U.S. v. Wykoff

Dist. Ct. did not err in entering $446,335 restitution order as part of defendant’s sentence on wire-fraud charge that included as part of “special instruction” requirement that any unpaid restitution balance during term of supervision be paid at rate not less than 10% of defendant’s gross monthly income. Moreover, govt. could properly apply for writ of garnishment with respect to defendant’s $47,937 pension account shortly after entry of judgment, since federal criminal code requires that restitution be paid immediately unless Dist. Ct. provides otherwise. Ct. rejected defendant’s argument that 10% provision in special instruction essentially limited govt.’s ability to collect on his restitution obligation.