United States v. Jesse Kaplan

Good Law
839 F.3d 795·2016 WL 5859856·2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 18247
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 7, 201615-30213; 15-30225California3,607 words

Opinion

Opinion

Appellants Jesse Kaplan (“Kaplan”) and Daniel Strycharske (“Strycharske”) appeal their 36-month sentence of imprisonment and final judgment of restitution in the amount of $2,771,929 on the ground that the district court erred by calculating the restitution award using replacement value instead of fair market value. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 .

We hold that district courts have discretion in calculating restitution,, and that while fair market value generally provides the best measure to ensure restitution in the full amount of. the victim’s loss, .“replacement value” is an appropriate measure of destroyed property under 18 U.S.C. § 3663A(b)(l)(B) where the fair market value is either difficult to determine or would otherwise be an inadequate or inferior measure of the value. We affirm the sentences on all other grounds.

BACKGROUND

This case arises out of Appellants’ quest to manufacture homemade hash oil and the tragic consequences of that quest. In the summer of 2013,. Kaplan and Strycharske met David Shultz (“Shultz”) at a marijuana festival where Shultz held himself out as knowledgeable about the hash oil manufacturing process. Appellants expressed…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.