Head

United States v. Head

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 28, 202423-831California326 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 28 2024

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 23-831 D.C. No. 2:08-cr-00093-KJM-AC-1 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v. MEMORANDUM*

CHARLES HEAD,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Kimberly J. Mueller, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 21, 2024**

Before: FERNANDEZ, NGUYEN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

Charles Head appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his

motion to modify his restitution order under 18 U.S.C. § 3664(k). We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Head contends his restitution order is internally inconsistent because it

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). requires restitution to be paid both in an immediate…

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.