Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Restitution and unjust enrichment is the field of law relating to gains-based recovery. In contrast with damages (the law of compensation), restitution is a claim or remedy requiring a defendant to give up benefits wrongfully obtained.
Nelson v. Colorado, 581 U.S. ___ (2017), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States. [1] In a 7-1 decision written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the Court held that a state had no right to keep fines and other money based on an invalid conviction. [2]
The Mandatory Victim Restitution Act of 1996, [13] codified in part at 18 U.S.C. § 3363A, requires courts to order that a defendant pay a victim restitution in certain cases, such as those that involve crimes of violence or pecuniary loss to the victim. [14] Child pornography cases are included in this mandate, as codified in 18 U.S.C. § 2259 ...
The modern crime victims' rights movement began in the 1970s, in part as a response to the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision Linda R.S. v. Richard D. (410 U.S. 614). In Linda R.S. , the court ruled that the complainant did not have the legal standing to keep the prosecutors' office from discriminately applying a statute criminalizing non-payment ...
The principle of reparation dates back to the lex talionis of Hebrew Scripture. Anglo-Saxon courts in England before the Norman conquest also contained this principle. Under the English legal system judges must consider making a compensation order as part of the sentence for a crime.
The life cycle of federal supervision for a defendant. United States federal probation and supervised release are imposed at sentencing. The difference between probation and supervised release is that the former is imposed as a substitute for imprisonment, [1] or in addition to home detention, [2] while the latter is imposed in addition to imprisonment.
Discover the latest breaking news in the U.S. and around the world — politics, weather, entertainment, lifestyle, finance, sports and much more.
Paroline v. United States, 572 U.S. 434 (2014), is a case in which the United States Supreme Court ruled that to recover restitution under 18 U.S.C. § 2259, the government or the victim must establish a causal relationship between the defendant's conduct and the victim's harm or damages.