Background
Daniel Robertson pleaded guilty to receiving, distributing, and possessing child pornography. The district court imposed a below-Guidelines prison sentence and ordered restitution to twenty-two victims totaling one hundred thirteen thousand five hundred dollars. Robertson appealed, arguing the court should have awarded only the three thousand dollar statutory minimum per victim.
The court’s reasoning
The Sixth Circuit reviewed the restitution order for abuse of discretion. Under Section eighteen of the United States Code, Section two thousand two hundred fifty-nine, restitution is mandatory for child exploitation offenses. The statute requires courts to assess the defendant’s relative role in the causal process underlying the victim’s losses. The Supreme Court case Paroline versus the United States provides the framework for this inquiry. It requires a reasoned estimate from available evidence, not mathematical precision. The court found the district court acted within its discretion by considering file counts and distribution conduct.
perpetuat[ed] the market for this stuff
What it means going forward
Defendants in child exploitation cases may face restitution awards scaled to the volume of material possessed and distributed, not just the statutory floor.