criminal sentences imposed by state courts: Our interpretation of the Code also must reflect the basis for this judicial exception, a deep conviction that federal bankruptcy courts should not invalidate the results of state criminal proceedings. The right to formulate and enforce penal sanctions is an important aspect of the sovereignty retained by the States. This Court has emphasized repeatedly “the fundamental policy against federal interference with state criminal proceedings.” Id. at 47, 107 S.Ct. at 360, 93 L.Ed.2d at 227 (internal citation omitted). The Court explained that a state criminal court’s ability to ch ) (stating that criminal restitution orders are exempt from discharge in bankruptcy proceedings); Warfel v. City of Saratoga, 268 B.R. 205, 213 (9th Cir. BAP 2001) (<HOLDING>); In re Steiger, 159 B.R. 907, 913 (9th Cir.
holding that because the restitution was ordered as part of a state criminal prosecution it was excepted from discharge in bankruptcy holding that any condition a state criminal court imposes as part of a criminal sentence is not dischargeable in bankruptcy holding that restitution ordered pursuant to the vwpa was not a separate civil proceeding that required a jury trial but a criminal penalty that was an integral part of the sentencing process holding civil restitution judgment that was originally imposed as part of a criminal sentence nondisehargeable holding that failure to report a change in federal taxable income as required by state law excepted state tax liability from discharge