United States v. John Cerizo
This text of 542 F. App'x 641 (United States v. John Cerizo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
1. A district court may order restitution as part of supervised release, see 18 U.S.C. § 3568, and adjust a restitution payment schedule in light of changes in the “defendant’s economic circumstances,” 18 U.S.C. § 3664(k). The district court didn’t abuse its discretion by requiring Cerizo to pay his underinsured motorist insurance award and unclaimed life insurance award towards restitution as a condition of his supervised release. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974, 981 (9th Cir 2009).
2. Cerizo’s claim that the district court erred- in denying him bail pending his supervised release hearing is moot. Even if it were not, Cerizo’s long history of dishonesty and ties outside Hawaii and the United States provided an ample basis for denying his bail request. See United States v. Garcia, 340 F.3d 1013, 1015 (9th Cir. 2003).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
542 F. App'x 641, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-john-cerizo-ca9-2013.