(Download) "United States v. Boccagna" by 2004 United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit August Term # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: United States v. Boccagna
- Author : 2004 United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit August Term
- Release Date : January 13, 2006
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 73 KB
Description
Defendant Francis Boccagna pleaded guilty in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Joanna Seybert, Judge) to one count of making a false statement to a federally insured lending institution in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1014. Sentenced to a term of three years probation, Boccagna appeals only from the part of his judgment of conviction that, pursuant to the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996 ("MVRA"), Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214, 1227 (codified principally at 18 U.S.C. §Â§ 3663A and 3664), orders him to pay $18,629,716 in restitution to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD"), the guarantor on various defaulted loans obtained pursuant to the charged criminal scheme. Boccagna challenges his restitution order on three grounds. First, he asserts that the order violates the Sixth Amendment as construed in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), because the award is based on facts that were neither proved beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury nor admitted by him in his plea allocution. Second, Boccagna argues that HUD was, in any event, not entitled to any restitution because its claimed out-of-pocket losses were more than offset by the fair market value of the foreclosed collateral that it acquired upon payment of the defaulted loans. See 18 U.S.C. § 3663A(b)(1)(B)(ii). Boccagna asserts that the district court erred as a matter of law in calculating offset value by reference to the nominal sale price at which HUD subsequently transferred title to the collateral to a city development agency. Finally, Boccagna submits that the district courts inclusion in its restitution order of certain expenses incurred by HUD in order to acquire title to the foreclosed collateral impermissibly compensated HUD for consequential damages.