Supreme Court of the United States
Benjamin Robers, Petitioner v. United States.
May 5, 2014572 U.S. 639
Summary
The Supreme Court held that under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act, 'any part of the property... returned' refers only to the money lost by a victim, not to collateral taken by the victim until that collateral is sold and proceeds are received. The sentencing court must therefore reduce the restitution amount by the money the victim received from selling the collateral, not the collateral's value when the victim took title. This ensures the victim is made whole without being required to prove the collateral's value at the time of foreclosure.
Holding
- Statutory interpretation of 'any part of the property... returned' under 18 U.S.C. § 3663A.. The phrase refers only to the specific property lost by a victim (money), and 'returned' means money received from the sale of collateral, not the value of the collateral when title was taken.
Docket 12–9012.
Cited authorities
Cited by
- United States v. Soto
- United States of America, Appellee v. Carmen Soto; Pedro Soto; and Steven Soto, Defendants, Appellants
- United States v. Soto
- United States v. Foistner
- Gordon v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.a.
- Darrell L. Smith
- Micah Kenton Krol v. State of Arkansas
- State of Minnesota v. Berry Alan Willis — McKeig, J., Dissenting