Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. STOIAN, 12-cr-65-JMH. (2015)

Court: District Court, E.D. Kentucky Number: infdco20150612999 Visitors: 240
Filed: Jun. 11, 2015
Latest Update: Jun. 11, 2015
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER JOSEPH M. HOOD , District Judge . This matter is before the Court upon the United States of America's Motion to Reconsider Restitution Order [DE 765] in which the United States asks that the Court reconsider its order [DE 731] of restitution in the amount of $69,539, as requested by the government in its Memorandum [DE 691]. The United States explains that it requested this amount in error as it covered only the wire transfer losses attributable to Defendant Stoia
More

MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER

This matter is before the Court upon the United States of America's Motion to Reconsider Restitution Order [DE 765] in which the United States asks that the Court reconsider its order [DE 731] of restitution in the amount of $69,539, as requested by the government in its Memorandum [DE 691]. The United States explains that it requested this amount in error as it covered only the wire transfer losses attributable to Defendant Stoian (as listed on one side of the spreadsheet related to him) and did not include the amount of bank wire losses attributable to him according to the testimony of Special Agent Lowe (and as reflected on the other side of the spreadsheet) which would yield an amount of loss, when considered together with the wire transfer losses, of $466,650.

The United States urges the Court to reconsider the matter as the amount ordered is "contrary to the testimony and the evidence entered at the hearing." The Court agrees that the testimony of Agent Lowe at the restitution hearing would have supported an award of restitution up to $466,650. However, the United States sought by its brief an amount which was less than the testimony might have permitted. Perhaps it did so in error, but that error cannot be assigned to the Court. This is not a reason to reconsider the order of restitution in this matter.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the United States of America's Motion to Reconsider Restitution Order [DE 765] is DENIED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer