Opinion ID: 3011147
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Payment of Restitution

Text: Crandon also argues that neither his current economic circumstances nor those in the foreseeable future allow for payment in full; therefore, the District Court should have imposed nominal periodic payments. The District Court, however, was required to impose mandatory restitution. See 18 U.S.C. S 2259. The court was not permitted to consider Crandon's economic circumstances. See 18 U.S.C. S 2259(b)(4)(B) (A court may not decline to issue an order under this section because of -- (i) the economic circumstances of the defendant.). After ordering full restitution, the court must set a payment schedule and may only order nominal periodic payments if the defendant proves indigency.3 In this case, the court noted that Crandon is a man with a college education with some master's points . . . [his] financial future is not bereft of hope. App. at 92. These findings, which are not disputed, suggest that Crandon's potential earning capacity precludes a determination of indigency. Accordingly, we do notfind the imposition of full restitution costs to be an abuse of discretion. _________________________________________________________________ 2. Crandon also argues that he should only be required to pay restitution for a percentage of the proximate cause. Appellant's Br. at 12. We note, however, that once proximate cause is established, the statute requires the court to order restitution for the full amount of the victim's losses. 18 U.S.C. S 2259(b)(1). There is nothing in the statute that provides for a proportionality analysis. 3. The mandatory restitution provision specifies that enforcement of the order follow the guidelines set forth in section 3664. See 18 U.S.C. S 2259(b)(3). According to section 3664, after ordering full restitution, the court must set a payment schedule. See 18 U.S.C. S 3664(f)(2). In considering the manner and schedule of payment, the court is required to consider the defendant's financial resources, assets, projected income, and financial obligations. If the defendant's financial situation does not allow the payment of any amount of a restitution order, and [does] not allow for the payment of the full amount of a restitution order in the foreseeable future under any reasonable schedule of payments, then the court can order nominal periodic payments. 18 U.S.C.S 3664(f)(3)(B). 6