United States v. Su Mun

Summary

The Fifth Circuit held that a defendant who pleaded guilty to maintaining a drug-involved premises could be ordered under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (MVRA) to pay restitution for funeral and cremation expenses to the families of victims who died at the hotel he owned and operated. The court rejected the defendant's argument that the MVRA precludes such restitution for property offenses, reasoning that the statute authorizes funeral and related costs when an offense results in bodily injury causing death, regardless of the offense type. The court also found sufficient evidence that the defendant's operation of the "addict's paradise" hotel was both the but-for and proximate cause of the victims' deaths due to the foreseeable risks of overdose and violence. This unpublished per curiam decision affirms the restitution award and clarifies that property offenses under 21 U.S.C. § 856(a)(2) can support restitution for death-related expenses under 18 U.S.C. § 3663A(b)(3).

Holdings

1. The MVRA authorizes restitution for funeral expenses because the statute focuses on the type of loss (bodily injury resulting in death) rather than the type of offense, and a property offense can result in such loss.
2. Mun's offense was a but-for and proximate cause of the deaths because but for his maintenance of the hotel, the deaths would not have occurred when they did, and the deaths were reasonably foreseeable consequences of his conduct.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (MVRA) precludes restitution for funeral and cremation expenses for a conviction of maintaining a drug-involved premises.
2. Whether the factual findings establish that Mun's offense directly and proximately caused the victims' deaths.

Disposition

affirmed