United States v. Curtis Blackwell, Jr.
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 5674
9th Cir.2017Background
- In 1993 Blackwell pled guilty to armed bank robbery and related firearm offenses; he was sentenced to 357 months and ordered to pay $10,000 in fines and $4,122 in restitution.
- Blackwell ceased payments in January 2013; the government demanded payment in 2015 and he moved pro se to set aside collection.
- Blackwell argued his liability expired in 2013 under 18 U.S.C. § 3613(b)(1), 20 years after entry of judgment as provided by the VWPA in effect at sentencing.
- In 1996 Congress enacted the MVRA, which amended § 3613(b) to extend termination of liability to the later of 20 years from judgment or 20 years after release from imprisonment.
- The district court applied the MVRA and denied Blackwell’s motion; the Ninth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which statute governs termination of liability (§ 3613(b)): VWPA (pre-1996) or MVRA (1996 amendment)? | VWPA applies; liability expired 20 years after judgment (2013). | MVRA applies; it extends collection period to later of 20 years from judgment or 20 years after release. | MVRA applies; it is procedural/remedial and extends collection period. |
| Is the MVRA’s application to extend collection time retroactive and barred by Ex Post Facto Clause? | Implicit: retroactive application violates Ex Post Facto. | MVRA is remedial/procedural and does not increase punishment or alter substantive rights. | No Ex Post Facto violation; procedural change that does not increase punishment. |
Key Cases Cited
- Friel v. Cessna Aircraft Co., 751 F.2d 1037 (9th Cir. 1985) (procedural or remedial statutes may apply to pending cases)
- Chenault v. U.S. Postal Serv., 37 F.3d 535 (9th Cir. 1994) (extensions of statutes of limitations are procedural)
- United States v. Gianelli, 543 F.3d 1178 (9th Cir. 2008) (procedural changes that do not increase punishment do not violate Ex Post Facto)
- United States v. Leo Sure Chief, 438 F.3d 920 (9th Cir. 2006) (applying an extension before limitations had run did not violate Ex Post Facto)