United States v. Adejumo, No. 15-3952 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseDefendant was ordered to pay restitution of almost $500,000 after he pled guilty to bank fraud and aggravated identity theft. The court concluded that, although the district court missed the 90-day deadline, the district court retained its power to order restitution; the government failed to provide sufficient evidence of the ultimate losses defendant caused the victim banks; and since more than four years have passed after defendant was originally sentenced, and in the interest of finality, the court declined to remand for a third restitution proceeding. Therefore, the court vacated the restitution amount.
Court Description: Murphy, Author, with Loken and Kelly, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. The court retained power to order restitution even though it missed the 90-day deadline in 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3663(d)(5); however, the government failed to provide sufficient evidence of the ultimate losses defendant caused the victim banks; since more than four years have passed since defendant was originally sentenced and because the government was aware of defendant's objections to its evidence and still failed to introduce the additional evidence needed to prove ultimate loss, the court will not remand the matter for a third restitution proceeding; the district court's award is vacated.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.