Sentencing – Restitution

Listen to this article

U.S. Court of Appeals  For the Seventh Circuit

Criminal

Sentencing – Restitution

Privately purchased disability benefits may be garnished to pay restitution.

“Section 3613(a)(1), which selectively incorporates exemptions from the Internal Revenue Code, makes express exceptions for two specific types of disability payments, workmen’s compensation, 26 U.S.C. § 6334(7), and military-related disability payments, id. § 6334(10), without mentioning private disability insurance. Further, the list in § 3613(a)(1) does not include § 6334(11), which exempts certain forms of public assistance, including Social Security disability payments. Although somewhat ‘beleaguered,’ the canon of expressio unius est exclusio alterius—‘the expression of one thing suggests the exclusion of others’—remains a compelling interpretive guide when ‘“the items expressed are members of an “associated group or series,” justifying the inference that items not mentioned were excluded by deliberate choice, not inadvertence.”’ Exelon Generation Co. v. Local 15, Int’l Bhd. of Elec. Workers, AFL-CIO, 676 F.3d 566, 571 (7th Cir. 2012) (quoting Barnhart v. Peabody Coal Co., 537 U.S. 149, 168 (2003)). Furthermore, ‘[w]here Congress explicitly enumerates certain exceptions to a general prohibition, additional exceptions are not to be implied, in the absence of evidence of a contrary legislative intent.’ Andrus v. Glover Constr. Co., 446 U.S. 608, 616–17 (1980); see In re Robinson, 764 F.3d 554, 562 (6th Cir. 2014) (applying this concept to § 3613(a)). Here, where Congress elected to incorporate the exemptions for certain forms of disability payments and not others, we think that a plain reading of the MVRA leads to the conclusion that it does not cover France’s disability payments.”

Affirmed.

14-2743 U.S. v. France

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Norgle, J., Tinder, J.

Full Text