WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court says a person convicted of a crime and later ordered to pay the victim must file a separate appeal to challenge the order.
The justices recently ruled 6-2 against a Florida man who was convicted of possessing child pornography and ordered to pay $4,500 to cover the victim’s loss.
Marcelo Manrique appealed his conviction, but not the restitution order, which came about two months later.
Manrique argued his initial appeal covered the later judgment.
But the Supreme Court said he should have filed a second appeal when restitution was ordered.
A federal appeals court also ruled against him.
The decision clarifies an area of law that has confused lower courts about when appeals must be filed to challenge orders that can come months after conviction.
- Posted April 26, 2017
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
Justices require new appeal for challenging victim awards
![](/Content/LegalNews/images/article_db_image1.jpg)
headlines Macomb
- Presenting an evening of humor
- State data, national surveys find disparity between active registered young voters and election turnout, large gap between college and noncollege youth
- Macomb County medical examiner's office welcomes Crime Scene Investigation Camp
- Governor establishes gun violence task force
- Macomb County man arraigned for impersonating fire personnel at crime scenes
headlines National
- Michelle Behnke looks to build community and strengthen the ABA with new strategic plan
- ACLU and BigLaw firm use ‘Orange is the New Black’ in hashtag effort to promote NY jail reform
- New research about legal operations is ‘at a crossroads,’ consortium leaders say
- You were probably not taught to market yourself; now what?
- Which BigLaw firms pay the highest starting salary?
- Netflix’s true-crime documentary about woman stalking man flows like book you can’t put down