UNITED STATES v. DILLON

Case No. 10-cr-00500-CRB-1.

USA, Plaintiff, v. DILLON, Defendant.

United States District Court, N.D. California.

December 9, 2021.


ORDER GRANTING RESTITUTION OFFSET

In 2010, Defendant Hari Dillon pled guilty to two counts of wire fraud and two counts of money laundering for his involvement in a fraud scheme. The Court ordered Dillon to pay just under $2 million restitution to the victims. See Restitution Order (dkt. 87). Dillon now asks to offset $1,870,819.60 of his restitution order. Mot. (dkt. 92) at 3.

Under the Mandatory Victim Restoration Act, the Court "shall [] reduce[]" restitution "by any amount later recovered as compensatory damages for the same loss by the victim in . . . any Federal civil proceeding; and . . . any State civil proceeding." 18 U.S.C. § 3664(j)(2); see, e.g., United States v. Doe, 374 F.3d 851, 856 (9th Cir. 2004). Offset is only proper where the victims receive the funds. United States v. Bright, 353 F.3d 1114, 1122-23 (9th Cir. 2004). The court may deny offset if proof is ambiguous. United States v. Bush, 252 F.3d 959, 963 (9th Cir. 2001).

The Court concludes that Dillon's submissions establish that the victims were paid in the stated amounts. Dillon has substantiated these payments with a detailed declaration and accompanying exhibits from Peter Rehon, who was the counsel of record for victims in state court proceedings that resulted in fourteen settlements. See Rehon Decl. ¶¶ 4-8. Dillon provided documentation for proof of payment, such as cancelled checks, settlement agreements, and emails to the United States Attorney's office outlining consistencies in payment history. See generally Rehon Decl. & Ex. A-F; Rehon Supp. Decl.; Exhibits to Rehon Supp. Decl.

For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS the motion. The Clerk of the Court is hereby ordered to credit Dillon with a restitution offset in the amount of $1,870.819.60.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases