indictment. BANKRUPTCY DISCHARGE Pepper contends that the district court could not order restitution as part of his sentence because the debts of some of the people that were to be compensated had been discharged in bankruptcy. We disagree. Generally, a bankruptcy proceeding and a criminal prosecution are fundamentally different proceedings, both in purpose and procedure, and the causes of action resolved by each are totally different. United States v. Tatum, 943 F.2d 370, 381 (4th Cir.1991). The pursuit of one proceeding will seldom resolve the other. Id. at 381-82. As such, we do not believe that a bankruptcy discharge has any effect on the district court’s power to order restitution in a criminal case. See Kelly v. Robinson, 479 U.S. 36, 50, 107 S.Ct. 353, 361, 93 L.Ed.2d 216 (1986) (<HOLDING>). In United States v. Carson, 669 F.2d 216 (5th
holding that retaliatory discharge is a clearly established first amendment violation holding the broad jurisdictional grant given the bankruptcy courts under the 1978 bankruptcy act unconstitutional holding that under the established law that bankruptcy courts could not discharge criminal judgments holding that 28 usc  1961a applies to bankruptcy court judgments because a bankruptcy court is a unit of the district court holding that the bankruptcy courts as compared to state courts have exclusive jurisdiction to determine issues of dischargeability under the bankruptcy code