Case: William Edward Neilly v. Michigan, No. 24-395
Lower Court: Michigan
Docketed: 2024-10-09
Status: GVR
Question Presented: Whether restitution ordered as part of a criminal sentence is punishment for purposes of the Ex Post Facto Clause.
The Court’s January 26, 2026 order granted the petition, vacated the Michigan judgment, and remanded the case for further consideration in light of Ellingburg v. United States, 607 U.S. ___ (2026). This GVR disposition, issued without full briefing or argument, signals that the Michigan courts must now apply that ruling to his circumstances.
William Edward Neilly, represented by Amanda Kelly Rice, challenged a Michigan restitution order imposed as part of his criminal sentence under the Ex Post Facto Clause. Michigan, represented by Heather Susan Bergmann and Jeffrey S. Getting, opposed the petition. The case was distributed for conference eight times before the Court acted. Full case details are available on the Supreme Court docket.
Practitioners handling criminal sentencing and restitution matters should monitor the Michigan proceedings closely. More information on the litigation history is available via Law360.