Defendant-appellant Robert Grant appeals from an amended judgment of conviction and sentence entered in the United States District Court for the Western District of New York (Skretny, J.) to the extent that the amended judgment incorporates an order modifying a direction for the payment of restitution. The modification was based on the district court's determination that there had been a material change in Grant's economic circumstances since the time restitution was first ordered.
Grant challenges the district court's determination, contending that the existence of his inmate account, said to constitute the changed circumstances in the case, was known to the government at the time of his original sentence. The district court decided that, because its attention was drawn to the account only after sentence was first imposed, its belated awareness of the monies in the account constituted a material change in Grant's economic circumstances and therefore justified modification of the restitution requirement originally imposed. We affirm, but for reasons different from those given by the district court.
Miner '56, Roger J., "US v. Grant, 235 F. 3d 95 - Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit 2000" (2000). Circuit Court Opinions. 184.
235 F.3d 95 (2000)
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Robert GRANT, Defendant-Appellant.
Docket No. 00-1251.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Argued September 18, 2000.
Decided December 13, 2000.
John Humann, Federal Public Defender's Office, Buffalo, NY, for Defendant-Appellant.
Martin J. Littlefield, Assistant United States Attorney, Buffalo, NY, (Denise E. O'Donnell, United States Attorney for the Western District of New York, on the brief), for Appellee.
New York Law School location: File #2875, Box #142