Opinion
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER, United States Attorney, MICHAEL D. ANDERSON, Assistant United States Attorney, Sacramento, CA., Attorneys for Plaintiff, United States of America.
MICHAEL B. BIGELOW, Counsel for Defendant.
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING RESTITUTION
EDWARD J. GARCIA, District Judge.
STIPULATION
Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through his counsel of record, hereby stipulate that the restitution hearing currently scheduled to be heard on November 9, 2012, be dropped from calendar and that the Court find that no restitution will be ordered in this case.
In light of the Ninth Circuit decision in United States v. Yeung 672 F.3d 594 (9th Cir. 2012), this case was set for restitution hearing following defendant Viramontes' convictions for his role in a mortgage fraud scheme. In Yeung, the Ninth Circuit confirmed that a restitution award requires an adequate evidentiary basis that would enable a district court to explain its reasoning for making the award. Id. ; see also United States v. Waknine, 543 F.3d 546, 557 (9th Cir. 2008) (finding an inadequate explanation of a restitution award).
In the present case, the government made multiple requests in order to obtain documentation and an accurate accounting that fairly establishes restitution from the victims or their successors in interest. Recognizing that this type of information can be difficult to obtain in a mortgage fraud case, since loans mortgage loans during the time period in question were often packaged and resold and many original lending institutions have failed and have been replaced by successors in interest, the Court has continued this matter a number of times for that purpose. However, the requested information has not been provided. The parties agree that a reasonable time has passed to allow compliance with the government's requests and that additional time is unlikely assist in obtaining the requisite documentation.
Accordingly, the government agrees that it is unable to establish the amount of restitution owed by the defendants in this case.
For the foregoing reasons, the parties request that this matter be dropped from calendar. It is further requested that the Court find that no restitution will be ordered in this case.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
ORDER
IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED.