[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] heard oral arguments [day call, PDF; merit briefs] Tuesday in Dolan v. United States [oral arguments transcript, PDF; JURIST report] on whether a district court may enter a restitution order beyond the time limit prescribed in 18 USC § 3664(d)(5) [text]. The petitioner, Brian Dolan, attacked a hitchhiker and was ordered to pay restitution to his victim. He argued that the court's restitution order came after the deadline imposed by the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act. The US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit held [opinion, PDF] that "a tardy restitution order is not an invalid one." Counsel for Dolan argued Tuesday that, "[o]nce that 90-day period has run ... the district court loses the authority to impose restitution." Counsel for the United States argued that the court may impose restitution after the 90-day period in certain circumstances.