The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Hyde, 122 F.3d 1075 (9th Cir. 1997):
Second, the defendant has the "burden of demonstrating" his financial resources by a preponderance of the evidence, if he wishes to avoid or reduce the restitution. See 18 U.S.C. 3664(d) (now 18 U.S.C. 3664(e)). Hyde refused to do that, but simply rested on his assertion that he could not pay at that time. In any event, if it turns out that he is truly unable to pay, he can, in due course, ask for relief. See United States v. Jackson, 982 F.2d 1279, 1284-85 (9th Cir.1992).
Finally, the district court did not err when it delegated the actual timing of restitution payments to the probation officer. See United States v. Barany, 884 F.2d 1255, 1259-60 (9th Cir.1989).
AFFIRMED in part and DISMISSED in part.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.