525 F. App'x 274
5th Cir.2013Background
- Hernandez appeals a restitution order for fence repair after fleeing police.
- District court ordered Hernandez to pay $1,450 for fence damage he undisputedly caused.
- Hernandez argued restitution based on repair costs is impermissible under Mitchell.
- The government did not concede that restitution based on repair costs is impermissible; court reviews for plain error.
- Court applies plain-error standard because Hernandez did not raise the issue in district court and disputes only cost proof.
- Court affirms restitution order, finding any error non-prejudicial and within discretion to not disturb the judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether repair-cost restitution is permissible under § 3663 | Hernandez argues Mitchell limits restitution to value, not repair costs | Hernandez relies on Mitchell but circuit splits exist on repair-cost restitution | No plain error; repair-cost restitution permissible per circuit precedent |
| Whether the error, if any, affected substantial rights | Hernandez contends error affected substantial rights by increasing restitution | No substantial-rights impact shown; pre-crime value could have been used without prejudice | Any error non-prejudicial; restitution order stands |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Maturin, 488 F.3d 657 (5th Cir. 2007) (plain-error review for restitution costs)
- United States v. Hord, 6 F.3d 276 (5th Cir. 1993) (plain-error review for restitution)
- United States v. Chemical & Metal Indus., Inc., 677 F.3d 750 (5th Cir. 2012) (C&M standard; not a concession on restitution loss)
- United States v. Achobe, 560 F.3d 259 (5th Cir. 2008) (plain-error review application in restitution)
- United States v. Mitchell, 876 F.2d 1178 (5th Cir. 1989) (limits restitution to return of property or its value)
- Sharp v. United States, 927 F.2d 170 (4th Cir. 1991) (cost of repairs as restitution measure)
- Quillen v. United States, 335 F.3d 219 (3d Cir. 2003) (follows repair-cost approach for damaged property)
- Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129 (2009) (plain-error framework; substantial rights)
- Hughey v. United States, 495 U.S. 411 (1990) (definition of restitution in context)