Dist.Ct. did not err in imposing $79,325 restitution order as part of defendant’s sentence on charge of preparing false tax returns for her clients, where said amount reflected what had not been collected at time of presentencing report from defendant’s clients who had submitted said returns. While defendant argued that said figure was improper because prosecutor should had told sentencing judge how much more it might collect from defendants’ clients, and that said amounts should have been revealed as exculpatory material under Brady, 373 U.S. 83, no Brady violation occurred, since defendant merely had to ask prosecutor how much more had been collected since date of presentencing report, but failed to do so. Moreover, defendant will receive credit against restitution award for whatever govt. collects from clients.
