Breaking News

A quick recap of the Robers opinion

Ronald Mann will analyze the Court’s decision.  But here is a quick summary.  The case involves the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act, which requires people who commit property crimes to pay victims “an amount equal to . . . the value of the property” less “the value (as of the date the property is returned) of any part of the property that is returned.”  Robers was convicted of submitting false mortgage applications, causing banks to lose money on the loans.  The Court holds (9-0) that the statute requires Robers to repay the net amount of money the banks lost on the loans.  The key is that the amount of restitution accounts for the value of the repossessed homes at the time they are sold by the banks, not the time they are repossessed.  Here, the banks took the houses and then sold them after their value declined; the Court says that doesn’t matter.

Recommended Citation: Tom Goldstein, A quick recap of the Robers opinion, SCOTUSblog (May. 5, 2014, 10:27 AM),