Opinion ID: 78355
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: The District Court Erred When It Calculated the Amount of the Forfeiture Money Judgment.

Text: Dr. Hoffman-Vaile argues that the district court erred when it calculated the forfeiture amount because it included the losses to private insurance companies and patients. The court, in imposing sentence on a person convicted of a Federal health care offense, shall order the person to forfeit property, real or personal, that constitutes or is derived, directly or indirectly, from gross proceeds traceable to the commission of the offense. 18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(7). Dr. Hoffman-Vaile argues that she can only be ordered to repay proceeds that resulted from Medicare fraud[,] and [a]ny amounts that she received from private insurance companies or other payors did not result from Medicare fraud. Because she has been ordered to pay restitution to the other victims, she argues that she should not be required to forfeit that amount to the government as well. This argument fails. The amounts that Dr. Hoffman-Vaile received from private insurance companies and patients are gross proceeds traceable to the commission of her fraud because, but for her Medicare fraud, she would not have been entitled to collect these sums from the companies and patients. See id. We are not persuaded by Dr. Hoffman-Vaile's argument that her forfeiture amount should be reduced because she has paid restitution to the other victims. Although this might appear to be a `double dip,' restitution and forfeiture serve different goals[.] United States v. Leahy, 464 F.3d 773, 793 n. 8 (7th Cir.2006). [T]he focus of restitution is on the victim, [but] forfeiture focuses on the defendant. United States v. Browne, 505 F.3d 1229, 1281 (11th Cir.2007). In addition to forcing the disgorgement of dishonest profits, therefore, forfeiture is also a punitive action against the defendant. Id. The district court did not err when it included in the forfeiture amount the sums paid by Dr. Hoffman-Vaile's other victims, the private insurance companies and her patients. Although the district court used the correct methodology, it miscalculated the amount of the forfeiture money judgment, as the government concedes. We vacate the judgment of forfeiture to allow the district court to correct the forfeiture amount from $705,161.87 to $695,742.96.