United States v. Milton F. Duvall, III

Good Law
91 Daily Journal DAR 2130·926 F.2d 875·1991 WL 19171·1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 2689·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1314
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 21, 199190-10197California909 words

Opinion

Opinion

Choy, J.

The only question we are left with on this appeal is whether the district court’s order requiring Milton F. Duvall (Duvall), defendant/appellant, to pay $1.7 million in restitution is illegal. We conclude that it is not and we affirm.

I. Factual and Procedural Background

Duvall pled guilty to one count of mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341 and one count of wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343 . These crimes were committed by Duvall in the course of operating an investment company. The plea agreement provided that the Government could argue for what it felt was the appropriate sentence with respect to the mail fraud violation. However, the Government agreed to make a non-binding recommendation to the court that Duvall receive a period of probation for the wire fraud violation.

The plea agreement also provided that the United States would recommend that Duvall be required to pay restitution to the victims of his actions. The agreement specifically provided that restitution would not “be limited to the scope of the charges in the Superseding Information or in the underlying indictment.” Thus the Government would recommend that Duvall be required to pay restitution…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.