United States v. Anita Prasad

42 F.3d 1404 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anita PRASAD, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-10142. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 4, 1994. * Decided Oct. 11, 1994. Before: BROWNING, FARRIS, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Anita Prasad appeals the restitution component of her sentence imposed following entry of a guilty plea to mail fraud and wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. Secs. 1341 and 1343. Prasad contends that the district court did not consider her financial resources, financial needs, earning ability, and dependents before imposing restitution of $158,941.79. 1 We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 and affirm. 3 We review for abuse of discretion a restitution order that falls within the statutory limits of the Victim and Witness Protection Act of 1982, 18 U.S.C. Secs. 3663-64 ("VWPA"). United States v. Mills, 991 F.2d 609, 611 (9th Cir.1993). We…