Filed: Oct. 12, 2016
Latest Update: Oct. 12, 2016
Summary: ORDER GRANTING THE GOVERNMENT'S REQUEST FOR RESTITUTION JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . Defendant Theo Adams ("Defendant") pled guilty to one count of aggravated identity theft. Plea Agreement at 2, ECF No. 46. In the plea agreement, Defendant agreed to pay approximately $377,000 in restitution. Id. at 2-3. The presentence investigation report (PSR) indicates that the victim banks have not sent restitution requests to the Victim Witness Coordinator of the United States Attorney's Office
Summary: ORDER GRANTING THE GOVERNMENT'S REQUEST FOR RESTITUTION JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . Defendant Theo Adams ("Defendant") pled guilty to one count of aggravated identity theft. Plea Agreement at 2, ECF No. 46. In the plea agreement, Defendant agreed to pay approximately $377,000 in restitution. Id. at 2-3. The presentence investigation report (PSR) indicates that the victim banks have not sent restitution requests to the Victim Witness Coordinator of the United States Attorney's Office,..
More
ORDER GRANTING THE GOVERNMENT'S REQUEST FOR RESTITUTION
JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge.
Defendant Theo Adams ("Defendant") pled guilty to one count of aggravated identity theft. Plea Agreement at 2, ECF No. 46. In the plea agreement, Defendant agreed to pay approximately $377,000 in restitution. Id. at 2-3. The presentence investigation report (PSR) indicates that the victim banks have not sent restitution requests to the Victim Witness Coordinator of the United States Attorney's Office, and that therefore Probation would not recommend restitution. PSR ¶ 14.
The Court held a status conference regarding Defendant's obligation to pay restitution on September 13, 2016. ECF No. 200. The Court ordered further briefing on the restitution issue. Id. The Government filed its restitution memorandum, ECF No. 207, and Defendant filed a response to the Government's memorandum, ECF No. 209. The Court now GRANTS the Government's request for restitution in the amount of $377,136.
I. OPINION
Defendant argues that the Government has not met its burden to show that the victim banks suffered a loss that entitles the banks to restitution. Def.'s Resp. to Govt's Restitution Mem. at 1. Defendant argues that because the victim banks did not file restitution requests, it is not known whether these banks received any money from foreclosure sales. Id. at 3. This argument is without merit because, as the Government points out, these loans were for lines of credit on houses that the Defendant did not own. Govt's Restitution Mem. at 2. Therefore, there were no valid deeds of trust which these banks could use to foreclose, and each loan was a complete loss. Id.
Also, the Defendant's inability to pay is immaterial. United States v. Kubick, 205 F.3d 1117, 1128 (9th Cir. 1999). Lastly, as conceded by the Government, Ms. Tiffany Nichols is not entitled to restitution.
II. ORDER
For the reasons set forth above, the Court GRANTS the Government's request for restitution in the amount of $377,136. The Government shall submit an order for the Court's signature which includes the amount of restitution to be paid to each victim, the names and addresses of the victims and the address and name of the individual or entity to whom the restitution payments shall be made (if different from the named victims).
IT IS SO ORDERED.