42 U.S.C. § 10601

Transferred

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar

[transferred]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 44 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1986–2023 · leading case: United States v. Munoz-Flores, 495 U.S. 385 (1990).
United States v. Munoz-Flores, 495 U.S. 385 (1990). · cites it 4× “See § 10601(d) (allocating moneys among programs); § 10602 (delineating eligible compensation programs); § 10603 (delineating eligible assistance programs). The scheme established by the Act includes various mechanisms to provide money for the Fund, including the simultaneously…”
United States v. William Howard Newman, 889 F.2d 88 (6th Cir. 1989). · cites it 5× “42 U.S.C. § 10601 (b). The fund is administered by the Director of the Department of Justice Office for Victims of Crime, 42 U.”
United States v. Jeff Pawlinski, 374 F.3d 536 (7th Cir. 2004). · cites it 2× “42 U.S.C. § 10601 (a). The Crime Victims Fund, which finances services to victims of crime, 42 U.”
State v. Kalakosky, 852 P.2d 1064 (Wash. 1993). · cites it 2× “42 U.S.C. § 10601 et seq. [17-19] Although the discovery and admissibility of rape crisis center notes is a much debated issue in recent case law nationwide, no decision has been located which even mentions federal preemption of this criminal discovery issue.”
Opert v. Crim. Injuries Comp. Bd., 943 A.2d 1229 (Md. 2008). · cites it 2× “98-473, 42 U.S.C. § 10601 et seq.). Some background is important.”
United States v. Rene Spiropoulos, 976 F.2d 155 (3rd Cir. 1992). · cites it 2× “2(i) fines are paid into a fund called the Crime Victims Fund, as required by 42 U.S.C.A. § 10601 (a) and (b)(1) (West, 1992 Supp.”
United States v. Siamac Zakhor, 58 F.3d 464 (9th Cir. 1995). · cites it 3× “42 U.S.C. § 10601 (b)(1). The first $6.2 million from this fund go to the judicial branch for administrative expenses.”
United States v. Edward Tholl, 895 F.2d 1178 (7th Cir. 1990). · cites it 2× “42 U.S.C. § 10601 (a), (b). The Attorney General is required to make annual grants from the Fund to eligible crime victim compensation and assistance programs.”
United States v. Regina Donaldson, 797 F.2d 125 (3rd Cir. 1986). · cites it 2× “See 42 U.S.C. §§ 10601 (b)(2), 10602 (Supp. II 1984).”
United States v. James Edward Ashburn, 884 F.2d 901 (6th Cir. 1989). · cites it 3× “The textual inference that special assessments are penal is reinforced by the fact that 42 U.S.C. § 10601 (b)(2) — which established the Crime Victims Fund — refers to the assessments collected under section 3013 as “penalty assessments.”
United States v. Anne Hankins, 858 F.3d 1273 (9th Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “Relatedly, we decide whether a district court may redirect restitution payments to the federal Crime Victims Fund, 42 U.S.C. § 10601 et seq., (“the Fund”), when a victim later disclaims restitution without making a direct assignment to the Fund.”
United States v. Lee Sellers, 42 F.3d 116 (2d Cir. 1994). · cites it 2× “Finally, subsection (i) states, “Notwithstanding of the provisions of subsection (e) of this *119 section, but subject to the provisions of subsection (f) herein, the court shall impose an additional fine amount that is at least sufficient to pay the costs to the government of…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.