From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Goodall v. U.S.

District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Oct 19, 2000
No. 99-CO-1063 (D.C. Oct. 19, 2000)

Opinion

No. 99-CO-1063

Filed October 19, 2000

Before Wagner, Chief Judge, and Steadman and Farrell, Associate Judges.


ORDER

The opinion of the court issued on September 28, 2000, is hereby modified in the following respect. On page 9 of the slip opinion, beginning on line 12 of the full paragraph, the remainder of that paragraph shall read:

See Holland v. United States, 584 A.2d 13, 15-16 (D.C. 1990) (restitution is a direct consequence of a guilty plea; "Unlike typical examples of `collateral' matters, . . . restitution . . . is an automatic result of the conviction in that there [is] no subsequent determination in a civil proceeding of the degree or amount of petitioner's liability. The result [is] absolutely part and parcel to the sentence itself."); see also Cuthrell v. Director, Patuxent Institution, 475 F.2d 1364, 1366 (4th Cir.) (consequence is "collateral" if it is not a definite, practical consequence of a defendant's guilty plea), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1005 (1973).


Summaries of

Goodall v. U.S.

District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Oct 19, 2000
No. 99-CO-1063 (D.C. Oct. 19, 2000)
Case details for

Goodall v. U.S.

Case Details

Full title:Carlos Goodall, Appellant, v. United States, Appellee

Court:District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Date published: Oct 19, 2000

Citations

No. 99-CO-1063 (D.C. Oct. 19, 2000)