United States Fourth Circuit

Reset A A Font size: Print

US v. Seignious, 12-4621

Defendant's conviction and sentence, including an order of restitution, for multiple offenses related to a bank fraud scheme, are affirmed, where: 1) while the imposition of restitution in this case without the various procedural requirements of the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (MVRA) being observed constitutes clear or obvious legal error, defendant has failed to carry his burden on appeal of demonstrating that such error affected his substantial rights; 2) the restitution order is adequately supported by the evidence; 3) defendant cannot establish that the district court's failure to sufficiently explain its reasoning with respect to imposing restitution upon him under the MVRA affected his substantial rights; and 4) defendant has failed to establish that the filing of the Restitution Worksheet approximately one week after the filing of his criminal judgment affected his substantial rights.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 07/01/2014
  • Published 07/01/2014

Judges

  • HAMILTON

Court

  • United States Fourth Circuit

Counsel

Copied to clipboard