United States v. Nicole Grant
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 9447
| 4th Cir. | 2013Background
- Grant appeals a district court order adding a special probation condition to apply tax refunds and other gains toward restitution.
- Restitution was set at $42,152 to SSA; monthly payments initially $250, later reduced to $125.
- Grant had received substantial tax refunds in multiple prior years, and jurisdiction over supervision moved from Florida to the Eastern District of Virginia.
- In 2011 the district court proposed a new condition to apply refunds, lottery winnings, inheritances, and other gains to restitution; Grant did not consent and counsel was appointed.
- The district court found the condition consistent with § 3664(k) and related provisions but did not make findings on Grant’s ability to pay or impact on dependents.
- We vacate the district court’s order, holding the court abused its discretion by imposing the condition without showing Grant could comply while supporting her family.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| May a district court modify restitution outside enumerated MVRA changes? | Grant contends no authority to add the condition without material change of ability to pay. | Government argues general probation-modification powers allow the condition to be added. | Abused discretion; enumerated MVRA scheme controls. |
| Did the district court err by imposing a special condition without evidence of ability to pay? | Grant asserts no evidence her family could be supported if refunds were diverted. | Government maintains court may adjust restitution obligations if needed to advance victim recovery. | Yes; court failed to assess impact on Grant’s ability to support dependents. |
| Was there a material change in Grant's economic circumstances justifying modification? | No material improvement; refunds were not a genuine windfall change. | Tax refunds constitute a windfall showing change in resources. | No material change shown; § 3664(k) not satisfied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dolan v. United States, 130 S. Ct. 2533 (2010) (MVRA aims to ensure victims are made whole)
- Leftwich, 628 F.3d 665 (4th Cir. 2010) (restitution modification requires record-based consideration of defendant's finances)
- Dawkins, 202 F.3d 711 (4th Cir. 2000) (record must reflect financial factors in restitution planning)
- Cohen, 459 F.3d 490 (4th Cir. 2006) (restitution order as part of criminal sentence; probation conditions enforceable)
- Bruchey, 810 F.2d 456 (4th Cir. 1987) (burden of restitution should not fall on dependents; assess ability to pay)