United States v. Dann
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 15012, 652 F.3d 1160, 2011 WL 2937944 (2011)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under California law, accrued child support payments belong to the minor child, who is the real party in interest, not the custodial parent. Therefore, these funds cannot be assigned to a third party through a federal criminal restitution order while the children are still minors.
Facts:
- Mabelle de la Rosa Dann, an American citizen, arranged for Zoraida Peña Canal to travel from Peru to the United States in 2006 to serve as her live-in nanny and housekeeper.
- Dann facilitated Peña Canal's entry into the U.S. using a fraudulently-obtained visa, coaching her on how to lie to immigration officials.
- Upon Peña Canal's arrival, Dann took her passport and tore up her return ticket to Peru.
- For approximately two years, Peña Canal worked for Dann, caring for her three children and maintaining the household without receiving any payment for her labor.
- During this time, Dann isolated Peña Canal, forbidding her from speaking to anyone outside the home, restricting her food intake, and subjecting her to insults and threats.
- When Peña Canal expressed a desire to return to Peru, Dann claimed Peña Canal owed her $8,000, having only worked off $7,000 of a supposed $15,000 debt for expenses.
- Shortly before Peña Canal's departure, Dann forced her to sign a false letter stating she had been paid minimum wage for her work.
- In April 2008, with the assistance of several friends, Peña Canal planned and executed an escape from Dann's apartment.
Procedural Posture:
- The United States government charged Mabelle de la Rosa Dann in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California with five counts, including conspiracy to commit visa fraud, forced labor, and harboring an alien.
- Following a trial, a jury convicted Dann on all five counts.
- The district court denied Dann's post-trial motions for a judgment of acquittal and/or a new trial.
- The district court sentenced Dann to 60 months' imprisonment and ordered her to pay $123,740.34 in restitution to the victim, Zoraida Peña Canal.
- As part of the restitution order, the district court directed that any accrued child support payments owed to Dann by her ex-husband be paid directly to Peña Canal.
- Dann appealed her convictions and the restitution portion of her sentence to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Under California law, are accrued child support payments the property of the custodial parent such that they can be assigned to a victim through a federal criminal restitution order while the defendant's children are still minors?
Opinions:
Majority - Gertner, District Judge
No. Under California law, accrued child support payments are not the property of the defendant parent and thus cannot be assigned to a victim as restitution while the children are still minors. The court determined that the obligation to pay child support runs to the child, with the parent acting merely as a 'conduit' for the funds. Citing California Supreme Court precedent, the court reasoned that the child's need for sustenance is the paramount consideration, and this principle extends to accrued payments, especially when children are minors. Even though Dann was incarcerated and not the current custodial parent, the court held that the funds legally belong to her children to meet their accrued needs. Therefore, the district court erred by treating the child support arrearages as Dann's personal property available for restitution. The court also affirmed Dann's convictions, finding sufficient evidence for a rational jury to conclude that Dann's scheme of non-payment, isolation, and threats of financial, reputational, and immigration-related harm constituted forced labor and the related offenses.
Analysis:
This decision establishes a significant precedent by clarifying that child support payments intended for minor children are shielded from a parent's creditors, including victims in federal criminal cases. It solidifies the principle that state law governs property rights in federal restitution matters and underscores the paramount importance of the child's welfare in legal disputes involving child support. The ruling serves as a strong caution to federal courts against intervening in family law matters, especially where the interests of unrepresented minor children are at stake, thereby limiting the pool of assets available to satisfy restitution orders.
