United States v. WILLIAMS
1:09-cr-00026
D.D.C.May 24, 2013Background
- Williams killed Sergeant Juwan Johnson during a gang initiation in Germany; he was convicted of second-degree murder and witness tampering after a 12-day trial.
- The MVRA requires restitution to the victim or the estate; restitution was deferred pending briefing on the amount.
- The government initially sought $756,000 for lost future earnings, later supported by actuarial expert; Williams challenged the amount as speculative.
- The court concluded restitution was appropriate and ordered a post-sentencing determination; briefing occurred and authorities analyzed the evidence.
- The court ultimately determined the losses and ordered $756,000 restitution to Johnson’s estate, with ongoing payment terms during incarceration and after release.
- The decision addressed whether MVRA applies, whether lost income can be recovered for a deceased victim, the evidentiary burden for losses, and whether any cap applies to restitution.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether MVRA applies to this case. | Government: MVRA applies to crimes of violence. | Williams: MVRA does not cap or selectively apply; argue for limited scope. | MVRA applies and mandates full restitution to the estate. |
| Whether MVRA permits restitution for lost income of a deceased victim. | Government: subsection (b) allows lost income for deceased victims. | Williams: lost income for death not covered by the statute's language. | MVRA requires restitution for lost income of a deceased victim. |
| Whether the amount of Johnson’s lost future earnings was proven by a preponderance of the evidence. | Government: actuarial analysis supports $756,000. | Williams: estimation is speculative and flawed. | The amount is proven by a preponderance of the evidence and set at $756,000. |
| Whether restitution is capped at $250,000. | Government: no statutory cap; MVRA applies fully. | Williams: relied on mistaken cap; argues cap should limit restitution. | There is no cap at $250,000; full amount ordered. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Serawop, 505 F.3d 1112 (10th Cir. 2007) (supports restitution for lost future income in death cases)
- United States v. Cienfuegos, 462 F.3d 1160 (9th Cir. 2006) (holds MVRA allows restitution for deceased victim's losses)
- United States v. Oslund, 453 F.3d 1048 (8th Cir. 2006) (endorses recovery of lost future earnings for deceased victims)
- In re Sealed Case, 702 F.3d 59 (D.C. Cir. 2012) (approves estimating future losses with reasonable certainty)
- United States v. Monzel, 641 F.3d 528 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (discusses approximation in calculating losses; reasonable certainty required)
- Dolan v. United States, 130 S. Ct. 2533 (2010) (prompt determination of restitution protects victims; lack of prior timing does not bar restitution)