In an insurance fraud prosecution, the district court's amended restitution order is affirmed where the provisions of the governing statute in this case, the Victim and Witness Protection Act of 1982, were complied with because, inter alia, the restitution order was imposed at the time that defendant was resentenced following the court of appeals' remand, and defendant did not show that she was prejudiced by the lapse of time preceding resentencing.
Argued: November 18, 2009
Decided: January 28, 2010
Richard Ware Levitt, Levitt & Kaizer, New York, NY
Jesse M. Furman and Rebecca A. Rohr, Assistant United States Attorneys, New York, NY