Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_04-cv-03912/USCOURTS-cand-4_04-cv-03912-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 690
Nature of Suit: Other Forfeiture and Penalty Suits
Cause of Action: 28:1345 Complaint for Forfeiture

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

SHARON CAULDER,

Defendant.

 /

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

$185,830.08 IN NET PROCEEDS FROM THE

SALE OF APARTMENT NUMBER D-3 OF THE

PROJECT KNOWN AS "PANIOLO HALE",

SITUATED AT KALUAKOI, ISLAND OF

MOLOKAI, COUNTY OF MAUI, STATE OF

HAWAII,

Defendant.

 /

No. CR 04-40016 CW

No. C 04-3912 CW

ORDER DENYING

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION

TO CORRECT

SENTENCE AND

VACATE/MODIFY

FORFEITURE ORDER 

On May 31, 2006, the Court sentenced Defendant Sharon Caulder

to thirty months imprisonment. In addition, the Court ordered

Case 4:04-cv-03912-CW Document 30 Filed 06/09/06 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 2

restitution to the bankruptcy trustee and to the IRS and ordered

that the restitution be satisfied by the monies held in the

forfeiture proceedings. Plaintiff United States moves to correct

Defendant's sentence and to vacate/modify the forfeiture order. 

Defendant opposes the motion. Having considered all of the papers

filed by the parties, the Court denies Plaintiff's motion. 

DISCUSSION

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35(a) provides that, within

seven days after sentencing, "the court may correct a sentence that

resulted from arithmetical, technical, or other clear error." 

Plaintiff argues that the Court is prohibited from ordering that

forfeiture funds be used to satisfy a restitution obligation and

thus Defendant's sentence should be corrected and the forfeiture

order should be vacated and modified. It cites United States v.

Bright, 353 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2004). But Bright does not support

Plaintiff's argument. First, Bright interpreted only the Mandatory

Victim Restitution Act (MVPA), which is not at issue in this case;

this case involves the standard restitution provisions found in the

Victim Witness Protection Act (VWPA). The Court has more

discretion under the VWPA than under the MVRA. See id. at 1121-23. 

Second, Bright involved funds that had already been forfeited. As

Defendant notes, the funds here have not yet been forfeited, and

Defendant was willing to give up her claim to the funds. Most

importantly, Bright held only "that the district court was not

required to attempt to transfer forfeited funds to Bright's

victims." Id. at 1116. Bright did not hold that the court could

not exercise its discretion. Here, the Court did exercise its

Case 4:04-cv-03912-CW Document 30 Filed 06/09/06 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 3

discretion, and there is nothing in Bright to support the

government's argument that the Court clearly erred in doing so.

Nor do the other two cases cited by Plaintiff support its

argument. In King v. United States, 152 F.3d 1200 (9th Cir. 1998),

the court held that taxpayers who forfeited revenue from their

marijuana operation could not claim loss deduction for the

forfeited funds. United States v. A Group of Islands, 185 F. Supp.

2d 117 (D. P.R. 2001), is similarly inapposite.

Defendant's sentence need not be corrected; there was no clear

error. 

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's Motion

to Correct Sentence and to Vacate/Modify Forfeiture (Docket Nos.

229 (04-40016) and 27 (04-4912)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 6/9/06

 

CLAUDIA WILKEN

United States District Judge

Case 4:04-cv-03912-CW Document 30 Filed 06/09/06 Page 3 of 3