United States v. Warren James Sharp

Bad Law
91 Daily Journal DAR 9486·941 F.2d 811·1991 WL 143804·1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 17579·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6217
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 5, 199188-5122California2,572 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ferguson, J.

Defendant Sharp appeals the district court’s sentencing and restitution order after entering a plea of nolo contendere. Sharp appeals on four grounds, asserting that: (1) the restitution order illegally exceeded the amounts contained in the counts pled, (2) the district court erred in accepting the guilty plea because Sharp did not understand the nature of the charges against him, (3) the district court breached the plea agreement between Sharp and the government by sentencing him to fifteen years in prison rather than the ten years recommended by the government and the government breached the plea agreement by not informing the court that petitioner was less culpable than other codefendants, and (4) the district judge was less than impartial, thus entitling Sharp to resentenc-ing by a different judge.

This case primarily presents the issue of whether restitution may be ordered for the loss suffered by all the victims of a wire fraud scheme when the court accepts a guilty plea to only one count of the scheme. In Hughey v. U.S., — U.S.-, 110 S.Ct. 1979 , 109 L.Ed.2d 408 (1990), the Supreme Court limited restitution under the Victim and Witness Protection Act (VWPA) to the offense…

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.