State v. Sweat, No. 95-1975-CR
| Court | Court of Appeals of Wisconsin |
| Writing for the Court | Before EICH, C.J., GARTZKE, P.J., and DYKMAN; DYKMAN |
| Citation | 550 N.W.2d 709,202 Wis.2d 366 |
| Decision Date | 04 April 1996 |
| Docket Number | No. 95-1975-CR |
| Parties | STATE of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent, d v. Robert W. SWEAT, Defendant-Appellant. |
Page 709
v.
Robert W. SWEAT, Defendant-Appellant.
Opinion Released April 4, 1996.
Opinion Filed April 4, 1996.
[202 Wis.2d 369] For the defendant-appellant the cause was submitted on the brief of Leon S. Schmidt, Jr. of Schmidt, Grace & Duncan of Wisconsin Rapids.
For the plaintiff-respondent the cause was submitted on the brief of James E. Doyle, Attorney General, and Maureen McGlynn Flanagan, Assistant Attorney General.
Before EICH, C.J., GARTZKE, P.J., and DYKMAN, J.
DYKMAN, Judge.
Robert W. Sweat appeals from a judgment ordering him to pay $364,597.23 in restitution to the victims of his racketeering scheme. Sweat argues that: (1) he is entitled to offset payments made to the victims from the total
Page 710
amount of restitution [202 Wis.2d 370] ordered by the trial court; (2) the victims' claims were discharged in bankruptcy; and (3) he may assert a civil six-year statute of limitations as a defense to the victims' claims. Because we conclude that the trial court erred when it refused to apply the civil six-year statute of limitations, we reverse the restitution order, remand and direct the court to hold a hearing taking this defense into consideration. We resolve the remaining issues against Sweat.Robert W. Sweat devised an illegal scheme in which he operated as an insurance agent and induced several individuals to give him money. He promised these individuals that he would invest their money in exchange for return rates between twelve and fifteen percent. During the 1980's, Sweat collected $364,597.23 as part of his scheme. Sweat moved to Texas in spring 1989 and filed a petition in bankruptcy in July naming the victims as creditors. In January 1990, the bankruptcy court discharged his debts.
Sweat was later apprehended and pleaded no contest to one count of racketeering, contrary to § 946.83(3), STATS. After a restitution hearing, the trial court ordered Sweat to pay $364,597.23 to the victims. In so doing, it ruled that the payments he had already made to the victims would not offset the amount that Sweat owed to his victims, that his 1990 bankruptcy discharge did not discharge these debts, and that a civil six-year statute of limitations did not apply to bar the victims' claims. Sweat appeals.
Sweat first argues that the trial court should have offset the restitution order with amounts he already [202 Wis.2d 371] paid to the victims. The trial court acknowledged that Sweat had already made payments to the victims totalling $75,119.54, but it disallowed an offset because "these were monies the victims were entitled to and would have received if the defendant had not squandered their investments." Sweat also claims an offset for services he performed for one of the victims.
The amount of restitution ordered is committed to the sound discretion of the trial court. State v. Boffer, 158 Wis.2d 655, 658, 462 N.W.2d 906, 907-08 (Ct.App.1990). We will affirm that decision if the court "examined the relevant facts, applied a proper standard of law, and, using a demonstrated rational process, reached a conclusion that a reasonable judge could reach." Loy v. Bunderson, 107 Wis.2d 400, 415, 320 N.W.2d 175, 184 (1982).
We reject Sweat's claim that the trial court acted unreasonably because there is no evidence that Sweat ever repaid any of the principal given to him by the victims. Had Sweat not deceived these victims, they would have received their principal back plus a large sum of interest. Thus, we conclude that the court acted within its discretion when it refused to offset its restitution order by the amount Sweat already paid.
Sweat also argues that the restitution order should have been offset for about 600 hours of services he claims he performed for one of the victims. Sweat, however, never billed this victim for these services when they were provided, never listed them as an asset in his bankruptcy proceedings, and drafted a bill only [202 Wis.2d 372] after these criminal proceedings commenced. 1 Because the funds given to Sweat were not "loans," but money induced as part of a racketeering scheme, the only "service" Sweat provided to this victim was, as the State suggests, "the total dissipation of $100,000 of her assets within an eighteen-month period." Thus, the court's failure to provide an offset for these alleged services was reasonable and proper.
Sweat...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Sweat, No. 95-1975-CR
...of restitution, the court of appeals found that the civil statute of limitations applies to restitution proceedings. State v. Sweat, 202 Wis.2d 366, 550 N.W.2d 709 ¶2 Based on our reading of Wis. Stat. § 973.20(14)(b) in conjunction with the rest of § 973.20, and considering the purposes of......
-
State v. King, No. 95-3442-CR
...binding on state courts in Wisconsin. We are bound only by the United States Supreme Court on questions of federal law." State v. Sweat, 202 Wis.2d 366, 373-74, 550 N.W.2d 709, 711 (Ct.App.1996) (citation omitted). Published court of appeals decisions have state-wide precedential effect. Se......
-
Roth v. City of Glendale, No. 97-3467
...published decisions of this court, or, on matters of federal law, decisions of the United States Supreme Court. See State v. Sweat, 202 Wis.2d 366, 373-374, 550 N.W.2d 709, 711 (Ct.App.1996), rev'd on other grounds, 208 Wis.2d 409, 561 N.W.2d 695 (1997). Here, in my view, Schlosser v. Allis......
-
Olson v. Kaprelian, No. 95-2322
...for the loss sought to be compensated."). Indeed, another panel of this court recently addressed such a scenario in State v. Sweat, 550 N.W.2d 709 6 Kaprelian moved for costs and attorney's fees arguing that this appeal was frivolous. See RULE 809.25(3), STATS. This motion is denied. ...
-
State v. Sweat, No. 95-1975-CR
...of restitution, the court of appeals found that the civil statute of limitations applies to restitution proceedings. State v. Sweat, 202 Wis.2d 366, 550 N.W.2d 709 ¶2 Based on our reading of Wis. Stat. § 973.20(14)(b) in conjunction with the rest of § 973.20, and considering the purposes of......
-
State v. King, No. 95-3442-CR
...binding on state courts in Wisconsin. We are bound only by the United States Supreme Court on questions of federal law." State v. Sweat, 202 Wis.2d 366, 373-74, 550 N.W.2d 709, 711 (Ct.App.1996) (citation omitted). Published court of appeals decisions have state-wide precedential effect. Se......
-
Roth v. City of Glendale, No. 97-3467
...published decisions of this court, or, on matters of federal law, decisions of the United States Supreme Court. See State v. Sweat, 202 Wis.2d 366, 373-374, 550 N.W.2d 709, 711 (Ct.App.1996), rev'd on other grounds, 208 Wis.2d 409, 561 N.W.2d 695 (1997). Here, in my view, Schlosser v. Allis......
-
Olson v. Kaprelian, No. 95-2322
...for the loss sought to be compensated."). Indeed, another panel of this court recently addressed such a scenario in State v. Sweat, 550 N.W.2d 709 6 Kaprelian moved for costs and attorney's fees arguing that this appeal was frivolous. See RULE 809.25(3), STATS. This motion is denied. ...