Mays
United States v. Mays
Opinion
Opinion
Facts
Michael Mays pled guilty to conspiracy to commit mail fraud. The court imposed a custodial sentence and supervised release. Pursuant to the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996 (MVRA), Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1227 (1996) (codified in relevant part at 18 U.S.C. §§ 3663A-3664), the court ordered Mays to pay restitution. See id. § 3556.
Mays made only nominal payments on his judgment and, so, shortly before termination of his supervised release, the United States applied to the district court for a writ of contin- UNITED STATES v. MAYS 14379 uing garnishment against Mays and his employer. The gov- ernment did not initiate a separate civil action to enforce the judgment, but instead filed the garnishment application under the docket number for Mays’s criminal case.
The district court notified Mays and his employer that Mays’s wages were being garnished and provided instructions on how to challenge the garnishment order. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 3202(b), 3202(d), 3205(c)(5). A hearing was held prior to the termination of Mays’s supervised release to review the garnishment order. At the hearing, Mays indicated that he had a jurisdictional objection to the…