Manrique v. United States
Issues
Is a defendant required to file a separate appeal to challenge his restitution award, which had been determined after he filed his appeal of the original judgment?
This case presents the Supreme Court with an opportunity to decide whether an appellant must file a separate appeal if he wishes to challenge a restitution award that was determined after he appealed the original judgment. Manrique argues that an appeal of an original judgment should “mature” to perfect an appeal of the amended judgment. See Brief of Petitioner, Marcelo Manrique at 22. He claims that such a process would be practical and would conform to the rules of process governing criminal appeals. See id. The United States, on the other hand, contends that allowing the original appeal to mature would contradict the text and purpose of Rule 4(b)(2). See Brief for the United States at 17. The outcome of this case will determine how many appeals appellants must file in circumstances involving amended judgments.
Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties
Whether a notice of appeal filed after a district court announces its sentence, but before it amends this sentence to specify a restitution amount, automatically matures to perfect an appeal of the amended judgment.
Petitioner, Marcelo Manrique, was discovered with child pornography on his computer. Brief for The United States in Opposition to Petition for Writ of Certiorari, at 2. He pled guilty in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida to the crime of possession of material showing a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct.
Edited by
Additional Resources
- Jaclyn Belczyk, Supreme Court to Rule in Bank Fraud Case, Jurist (Apr. 25, 2016).
- Manrique v. United States, Oyez. Chicago-Kent College of Law at Illinois Tech (Sept. 1, 2016).
- Manrique v. United States, ScotusBlog, (Sept. 1, 2016).
- High Court Takes Up Dispute On Deferred Restitution Appeals, Stewart Bishop, Law360 (April 25, 2016).