Opinion ID: 2652634
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Revisiting Restitution

Text: Carter completed his 70-month term of incarceration in April 2011. After beginning his 36-month term of supervised release, Probation informed Carter, to his apparent surprise, that his restitution obligation remained outstanding and that he needed to begin making payments. In November 2011, he filed a motion arguing the forfeited assets should have more than satisfied the restitution of $505,781.01. The Government conceded that post-sentence credits and payments were not up to date, and that after applying a credit of $427,082, from the cash and sale of assets, and payments of $12,743, from monies paid by Carter’s co-defendants, the remaining balance was actually $65,955.73. Carter countered that he was not liable for any amount because the estimated value of the forfeited real and personal property at the time of his sentencing satisfied the obligation. UNITED STATES V. CARTER 9 Further, Carter argued, all parties understood that the restitution obligation of $505,781.01 would be satisfied in full with the forfeited assets. The district court accepted the Government’s updated accounting and reduced Carter’s remaining restitution obligation to $65,955.73, rejecting Carter’s contention that his restitution obligation had been fully satisfied upon the Government’s seizure of the assets and finding, after reviewing the sentencing transcripts, that it “ordered restitution in the amount of $505,781.01 . . . well aware . . . that the net value of the forfeited assets was estimated to be $505,781.01.” The district court further stated that it “did not order that the crediting of proceeds of the forfeited assets, if this estimate proved to be incorrect, would fully satisfy the amount of restitution owed. Rather, the court recognized only that the proceeds would be credited towards satisfying the restitution.”