Background
Matthew Matherne pleaded guilty to production of child pornography after abducting and abusing a fifteen-year-old girl. The district court ordered restitution of one hundred fifty-five thousand two hundred fifty-five dollars and forty-eight cents, including projected counseling costs. Matherne appealed, arguing the evidence was unreliable and that the government failed to prove causation.
The court’s reasoning
The court reviewed the restitution award for abuse of discretion and found the evidence sufficient. The district court relied on five exhibits, including a letter from the victim’s counselor and a cost-estimate chart. Although the chart contained two arithmetic errors, the court found these did not undermine the reliability of the counselor’s recommendations regarding treatment duration and frequency. The court noted that the government need not prove the necessity of psychological care under the relevant statute. The court also found ample evidence of causation, as the counselor’s report linked the treatment to the specific abduction and abuse committed by Matherne.
What it means going forward
The decision clarifies that minor calculation errors in restitution charts do not automatically require vacatur if the underlying evidence of need and cost is reliable. It reinforces that defendants challenging restitution must show the evidence lacks reliability or that the error affected the final award amount.