United States v. Ernest Nelson

MEMORANDUM

Ernest Nelson pled guilty to one count of willfully filing a fraudulent tax return in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7206 (1). The district court ordered restitution, to which Nelson did not object. On appeal, Nelson challenges the district court’s authority to enter the restitution order. We hold that the district court properly ordered restitution but remand for the district court to correct its clerical error.

The legality of restitution orders is reviewed de novo, United States v. Stoddard, 150 F.3d 1140, 1147 (9th Cir.1998), and the amount of restitution is reviewed for abuse of discretion. United States v. Fu Sheng Kuo, 620 F.3d 1158, 1162 (9th Cir.2010). Here, because Nelson did not object to the restitution order in the proceedings below, his claim is reviewed for plain error. Id. Accordingly, Nelson must show error that is plain, and that affects his substantial rights. United States v. Pelisamen, 641 F.3d 399, 404 (9th Cir.2011). Should he make such a showing, we may then grant relief only if “the error seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” Fu Sheng Kuo, 620 F.3d at 1164 (quoting United States v. Cotton, 535 U.S.…