United States v. Mancini
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 23414
| 8th Cir. | 2010Background
- Mancini pled guilty to one count of wire fraud for material misstatements on a mortgage application.
- District court found $44,200 loss to Mortgage Guarantee Insurance Corporation, increasing offense level by six and setting restitution at $44,200.
- Loan originated November 2006: $165,750 disbursed; Mancini falsely claimed employment and income on the application.
- Foreclosure occurred January 2008; lender suffered a net loss of $44,200 after adjustments, which Mortgage Guarantee paid.
- Mancini argued insurer should not be treated as a victim for loss calculation and restitution; district court rejected this and held both lender and insurer as victims.
- Court affirmed (1) loss calculation and (2) $44,200 restitution to Mortgage Guarantee under MVRA, and upheld the six-level offense enhancement.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Mortgage Guarantee is a victim for loss calculation | Mancini argues insurer is not a victim | State argues insurer not a victim to be included | Yes; insurer is a victim for loss calculation |
| Whether the loss amount of $44,200 is supported | Mancini asserts lender alone suffered loss; insurer offsets the loss | State argues insurer loss should be included as direct loss | Yes; loss to insurer is properly included, amounting to $44,200 |
| Whether restitution to Mortgage Guarantee under MVRA is proper | Mancini contends insurer restitution may not be MVRA-recoverable | State argues insurer qualifies as victim under MVRA and payer of loss | Yes; MVRA restitution to insurer properly ordered |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Jimenez, 513 F.3d 62 (3d Cir. 2008) (loss includes insurance payout as a direct loss)
- United States v. Alegria, 192 F.3d 179 (1st Cir. 1999) (insurance shifts loss to insurer but still a loss to victims)
- United States v. Castellano, 349 F.3d 483 (7th Cir. 2003) (loss to insurer may be included in loss calculation)
- United States v. Daniels, 148 F.3d 1260 (11th Cir. 1998) (per curiam; insurer as recipient of loss)
- United States v. Miller, 588 F.3d 560 (8th Cir. 2009) (standard for reviewing loss determinations; de novo/clear-error framework)
- United States v. Hodge, 588 F.3d 970 (8th Cir. 2009) (guidelines interpretation and loss calculation review)