Opinion ID: 2491
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Is the NBA a Victim?

Text: The VWPA defines victim as a person directly and proximately harmed as a result of the commission of an offense for which restitution may be ordered including, in the case of an offense that involves as an element a scheme, conspiracy, or pattern of criminal activity, any person directly harmed by the defendant's criminal conduct in the course of the scheme, conspiracy, or pattern. 18 U.S.C. § 3663(a)(2); accord id. § 3663A(a)(2). [4] Although the definition of victim is certainly broad, in determining whether one qualifies as a victim, a sentencing court can only consider the offense or offenses for which the defendant was convicted. See Hughey v. United States, 495 U.S. 411, 413, 110 S.Ct. 1979, 109 L.Ed.2d 408 (1990); United States v. Metal Lathers Local 46 Pension Fund (In re Local # 46 Metallic Lathers Union), 568 F.3d 81, 86 (2d Cir.2009). Thus, restitution may be ordered only for the loss caused by the specific conduct that is the basis of the offense of conviction. Hughey, 495 U.S. at 413, 110 S.Ct. 1979. [T]he loss caused by the conduct underlying the offense of conviction establishes the outer limits of a restitution order. Id. at 420, 110 S.Ct. 1979. On the facts presented in this case, we conclude that the NBA was directly and proximately harmed by Battista committing the crime of conspiracy to transmit wagering information. 18 U.S.C. § 3663(a)(2). As the district court explained, [o]ne of the key features of this conspiracy was that Donaghy was able to gain a wagering advantage for Battista by using confidential information belonging to the NBA in the course of providing him with `picks' on games he refereed. 570 F.Supp.2d at 420. Although Battista did not defraud the NBA directly, we conclude that the district court properly characterized the NBA as a victim under the VWPA because the NBA was harmed by the conduct committed during the course of the conspiracy to transmit wagering information, e.g., Battista's use of nonpublic information solely belonging to the NBA (conveyed to him by the co-conspirators) to place illegal wagers on its games. Moreover, we must look at Battista's offense of conspiracy, in which his criminal conduct encompasses not just his own acts but also those of his co-conspirators. See United States v. Boyd, 222 F.3d 47, 50-51 (2d Cir.2000) (per curiam). By this standard, Battista's crime plainly harmed the NBA.