Opinion
14-40138-01-DDC
10-15-2021
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. AHMAD SALIM SALTI, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
DANIEL D. CRABTREE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
The court grants defendant's unopposed Motion to Stay Execution of Restitution Order (Doc. 90). Fed. R. Crim. P. 38(e)(1) allows a district court to stay “any sentence providing for restitution under 18 U.S.C. § 3556[, ]” if defendant appeals. Although defendant has filed a notice of appeal and the Tenth Circuit has docketed his appeal, the court concludes that it retains jurisdiction to enter a stay under Fed. R. Crim. P. 38(e)(1). See United States v. Goodyear, No. CR-17-179-HE, 2019 WL 4180521, at *2 (W.D. Okla. Aug. 8, 2019), report and recommendation adopted, No. CR-17-00179-001-HE, 2019 WL 4179527 (W.D. Okla. Sept. 3, 2019) (concluding that defendant's notice of appeal did not divest the court of jurisdiction over the government's application for post-judgment writ of garnishment and defendant's related argument that the court stay its garnishment order); see also United States v. Alvarez, No. 14-CR-1748-GPC, 2015 WL 13187313, at *2 (S.D. Cal. Apr. 10, 2015) (granting stay of restitution order pending appeal under Fed. R. Crim. P. 38(e)(1) even though defendant had filed notice of appeal). Because the parties agree that a stay of the court's restitution order is reasonable, and a stay would not prejudice the government nor the victim, the court grants the unopposed Motion to Stay Execution of Restitution Order (Doc. 90). 1
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE COURT THAT defendant's unopposed Motion to Stay Execution of Restitution Order (Doc. 90) is granted.
IT IS SO ORDERED. 2