United States v. Efren Pangilinan Sanga

Good Law
92 Daily Journal DAR 8507·967 F.2d 1332·1992 WL 136508·1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 14114·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5332
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 22, 199291-10455California2,199 words

Opinion

Opinion

Pregerson, J.

Efren Pangilinan Sanga appeals an order of restitution imposed as part of his sentence following entry of guilty pleas to conspiracy to smuggle aliens, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324 (a)(1)(D) and 18 U.S.C. § 371 , and unlawful procurement of citizenship, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1425 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

I

Status of Annie Marie Quinlob as a “Victim”

Sanga contends that the person to whom he was ordered to pay restitution, Annie Marie Quinlob, is not a “victim” within the meaning of the Victim and Witness Protection Act of 1982 (VWPA), 18 U.S.C. §§ 3663 , 3664 (formerly codified at 18 U.S.C. §§ 3579 , 3580), and is not entitled to restitution. Sanga argues that because Quinlob was a willing participant in the conspiracy to smuggle herself into Guam, she could not be at the same time a victim of that conspiracy. This argument lacks merit.

We review de novo both the legality of a restitution order, United States v. McHenry, No. 90-10423, slip op. 5691, 5695, 1991 WL 340282 (9th Cir. May 19, 1992), and the district court’s conclusion that a person is a victim for purposes of the VWPA, United States v. Salcedo-Lopez, 907 F.2d 97, 98 (9th…

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.