- Court: 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Archives
- Area(s) of Law: Remedies
- Date Filed: 10-25-2022
- Case #: 22-70098
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Graber, Circuit Judge, for the Court; Circuit Judges Friedland & Koh
- Full Text Opinion
After Defendant kidnapped Petitioner, he was indicted with five criminal counts related to sex trafficking. Defendant entered into a plea agreement under which the five criminal charges brought against him would be dropped in exchange for him pleading guilty to two lesser offenses and paying restitution to Petitioner. When Defendant got a new lawyer he argued that the district court lacked the authority to order him to pay restitution. Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus seeking restitution under 18 U.S.C. § 3771(d)(3) of the Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA). Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3663(a)(3), when a defendant agrees to pay restitution as part of a plea agreement the district court has statutory authority to award restitution. United States v. McAninch, 994 F.2d 1380, 1384 n.4 (9th Cir. 1993); United States v. Soderling, 970 F.2d 529, 534 n.9 (9th Cir. 1992) (per curiam). Having determined that the district court could award restitution, the Court determined how restitution would be calculated. According to the plea agreement, Defendant agreed to pay restitution limited to the six categories of loss described in 18 U.S.C. § 2259(b)(3). PETITION GRANTED.