In US v. Mancini, No. 10-1178, the court affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence for wire fraud, for material misstatements made in a mortgage application, holding that 1) the loss to the victim flowed as directly from the fraud as the default on the loan which caused the lender's loss; and 2) under the plain wording of the Mandatory Victim Restitution Act, the district court properly applied the restitution statute and did not abuse its discretion in ordering defendant to pay $44,200 in restitution to the victim.
As the court wrote: "Angelo Mancini pled guilty to one count of wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, for material misstatements made in a mortgage application. At sentencing,
the district court found that Mancini's offense had resulted in a total loss of $44,200 to Mortgage Guarantee Insurance Corporation (Mortgage Guarantee). This loss amount increased Mancini's offense level by six levels, see U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(1), resulting in an advisory guideline range of twelve to eighteen months."