United States v. Wilson

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: January 27, 2025
• Docket: 24-3413
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 27 2025 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 24-3413 D.C. No. 4:23-cr-00111-BMM-1 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v. MEMORANDUM* JACOB EDWIN WILSON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana Brian M. Morris, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 22, 2025**

Before: CLIFTON, CALLAHAN, and BENNETT, Circuit Judges.

Jacob Edwin Wilson appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the $7,000 restitution award imposed following his guilty-plea

conviction for false information and hoaxes, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1038(a)(1).

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we vacate the order of

* 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). restitution and remand.

As the government concedes, the district court erred by failing to resolve

Wilson’s specific objections to the restitution sum sought by the restitution payee.

See 18 U.S.C. § 3664(e); United States v. Tsosie, 639 F.3d 1213, 1222 (9th Cir.

2011) (stating that 18 U.S.C. § 3664 “requires both that a district court set forth its

reasons in resolving a dispute over restitution and that a restitution award . . . be

adequately supported by evidence in the record.”). Accordingly, we vacate the

order of restitution, and remand to allow the district court to adjudicate Wilson’s

objections and reimpose restitution accordingly.

In light of this disposition, we do not address Wilson’s additional challenges

regarding his ability to pay the restitution ordered.

VACATED and REMANDED.

2 24-3413