From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Burtis

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 25, 2012
CASE NO.: 1:10-CR-00343 LJO (E.D. Cal. Jan. 25, 2012)

Opinion

CASE NO.: 1:10-CR-00343 LJO

01-25-2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. RANDAL ALFRED BURTIS, and ROBERT MORRIS ADAMS, Defendants.

ROBERT FORKNER Attorney for Defendant RANDAL ALFRED BURTIS kirk w. McAllister Attorney for Defendant ROBERT MORRIS ADAMS ADAM STEWART Attorney for MINTURN NUT CO., INC. BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney KIRK E. SHERRIFF STANLEY A. BOONE Assistant U.S. Attorneys


BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

KIRK E. SHERRIFF

STANLEY A. BOONE

Assistant U.S. Attorneys

Attorneys for the

United States of America

STIPULATION BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES, DEFENDANT RANDAL BURTIS,

DEFENDANT ROBERT ADAMS, AND MINTURN NUT CO.;

ORDER

Plaintiff the United States of America, defendant Randal Alfred Burtis, defendant Robert Morris Adams, and Minturn Nut Co., Inc. ("Minturn"), by and through their respective undersigned counsel of record, hereby stipulate and jointly request that the Court amend the restitution amount owed to Minturn in the judgments as to defendants Burtis and Adams filed December 28, 2011, to reflect settlement payments that these co-defendants made to Minturn prior to the issuance of the judgments.

The judgments filed December 28, 2011 order defendants Burtis and Adams to pay restitution to Minturn in the amount of $1,134,599.59. This amount represents the loss that Minturn incurred due to the defendants' conduct in this case. However, pursuant to a civil settlement, defendant Adams subsequently repaid to Minturn funds and assets valued at $200,000. Also pursuant to a civil settlement, defendant Burtis subsequently repaid to Minturn funds and assets valued at $100,000. These settlement amounts were paid before the judgments were issued in this case. Minturn agrees that it has received $300,000 from these defendants in repayment for the fraud loss it incurred in this case, resulting in a net loss to Minturn in the amount of $834,599.59.

Accordingly, the United States, defendant Burtis, defendant Adams, and Minturn jointly stipulate and respectfully request that the Court order that the judgments as to defendants Burtis and Adams be amended to reflect that these defendants owe restitution to Minturn, jointly and severally with co-defendant Ronald Salado, in the amount of $834,599.59 (rather than $1,134,599.59). This stipulation is not intended to modify the judgments in any other respect.

Respectfully Submitted,

By: __________________

(authorized on 1/21/12)

ROBERT FORKNER

Attorney for Defendant

RANDAL ALFRED BURTIS

By: __________________

(authorized on 1/24/12

KIRK W. MCALLISTER

Attorney for Defendant

ROBERT MORRIS ADAMS

By: __________________

(authorized on 1/20/12)

ADAM STEWART

Attorney for

MINTURN NUT CO., INC.

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

By: __________________

KIRK E. SHERRIFF

STANLEY A. BOONE

Assistant U.S. Attorneys

ORDER

The Court has reviewed and considered the stipulation of the United States, defendant Randal Burtis, defendant Robert Adams, and Minturn Nut Co. to amend the judgments in this case as to defendants Burtis and Adams to correct the restitution amount owed to Minturn Nut Co. For the reasons set forth in the stipulation, it is ordered that the judgments for defendants Burtis and Adams be amended to reflect that these defendants owe restitution to Minturn Nut Co., jointly and severally with co-defendant Ronald Salado, in the amount of $834,599.59 (rather than $1,134,599.59). The judgments are not amended in any other respect. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Lawrence J. O'Neill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

United States v. Burtis

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 25, 2012
CASE NO.: 1:10-CR-00343 LJO (E.D. Cal. Jan. 25, 2012)
Case details for

United States v. Burtis

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. RANDAL ALFRED BURTIS, and ROBERT…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jan 25, 2012

Citations

CASE NO.: 1:10-CR-00343 LJO (E.D. Cal. Jan. 25, 2012)