Background
Defendant Radu Miclaus was convicted of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and other offenses related to the Bayrob Group malware scheme. At his initial sentencing in 2019, the government stated it was not seeking restitution, and the court did not order it. After an appeal resulted in a general remand for resentencing, the government requested restitution of eight hundred fifty-three thousand six hundred fifty-one dollars and ninety-nine cents. The district court imposed this amount, leading to this appeal.
The court’s reasoning
The court held that a general remand wipes the slate clean, allowing the district court to consider new arguments and evidence, including restitution, even if waived previously. However, the court found that the defendant was not provided with the underlying information necessary to challenge the restitution amount, necessitating a remand for resentencing on that specific issue.
What it means going forward
Defendants may face restitution on remand even if the government initially waived it, but must be provided with sufficient data to contest the amount.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download