Brian Russell Dolan v. United States (560 U.S. 605)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 14, 2010 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 560 U.S. 605 · 130 S. Ct. 2533
- Decided
- June 14, 2010
- Term
- October Term 2009
- Vote
- 5–4
- Majority author
- Justice Breyer
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Justice Breyer delivered the opinion of the Court. This case concerns the remedy for missing a statutory deadline. The statute in question focuses upon mandatory restitution for victims of crimes. It provides that “the court shall set a date for the final determination of the victim’s losses, not to exceed 90 days after sentencing.” 18 U. S. C. § 3664(d)(5). We hold that a sentencing court that misses the 90-day deadline nonetheless retains the power to order restitution — at least where, as here, the sentencing court made clear prior to the deadline’s expiration that it would order restitution, leaving open (for more than 90 days) only the amount. I On February 8,2007, petitioner Brian Dolan pleaded guilty to a federal charge of assault resulting in serious bodily injury. 18 U. S. C. §§ 113(a)(6), 1153; App. 17. He entered into a plea agreement that stated that “restitution... may be ordered by the Court.” Id., at 18. The presentence report, provided to the court by the end of May, noted that restitution was required. But, lacking precise information about hospital costs and lost wages, it did not recommend a restitution amount. Id., at 27. On July 30, the District Court held Dolan’s sentencing hearing. The judge sentenced Dolan to 21 months’ imprisonment along with 3 years of supervised release. Id., at 38. The judge, aware that restitution was “mandatory,” said that there…
Excerpt of a 27,724-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.