United States v. Gloria Zack , 421 F. App'x 728 ( 2011 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 15 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 09-50660
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 8:09-cr-00031-JVS
v.
MEMORANDUM *
GLORIA ZACK,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
James V. Selna, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 8, 2011 **
Before: FARRIS, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Gloria Zack appeals from the restitution order imposed following her guilty
plea conviction for wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1343 and 1346. We
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Zack contends that her restitution order violated the Eighth Amendment
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
prohibition against excessive fines because it was grossly disproportionate to the
crime committed. This argument lacks merit. See United States v. Dubose, 146
F.3d 1141, 1145 (9th Cir. 1998) (“Where the amount of restitution is geared
directly to the amount of the victim’s loss caused by the defendant’s illegal
activity, proportionality is already built into the order.”)
Zack also contends that the government failed to provide facts to
substantiate the amount of restitution ordered. The record reflects that the district
utilized reliable evidence to resolve the dispute as to the proper amount of
restitution by a preponderance of the evidence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3664(e); see also
United States v. Waknine, 543 F.3d 546, 557 (9th Cir. 2008).
Zack’s request for a remand for further hearing on the issue of restitution is
denied. See United States v. Rice, 38 F.3d 1536, 1546 (9th Cir. 1994).
AFFIRMED.
2 09-50660