Wyatt
United States v. Wyatt
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Pursuant to a plea agreement, Defendant Marcel Robert Wyatt pleaded guilty to one count of assault by striking, beating, or wounding, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 113 (a)(4). The district court sentenced him to five years’ probation and imposed restitution of $18,377.15, to be paid to the Indian Health Service (IHS). Defendant appeals on only one ground: that IHS was not a proper recipient of restitution. On de novo review, United States v. Laney, 189 F.3d 954, 964-65 (9th Cir.1999), we affirm.
I. Defendant did not waive this argument in his plea agreement.
As a threshold matter, the government argues that Defendant waived any argument concerning the award of restitution by accepting the plea agreement. That argument is unavailing. This court has held that a general waiver of the right to appeal, like the one contained in Defendant’s plea agreement, does not waive a defendant’s right to “assert[ ] a violation of the statute governing the imposition of restitution.” United States v. Johnston, 199 F.3d 1015, 1023 (9th Cir.1999); see also United States v. Phillips, 174 F.3d 1074, 1076 (9th Cir.1999).
*677 II. IHS may receive restitution under 18 U.S.C. § 366k-