The following excerpt is from U.S. v. McGuirk, 29 F.3d 636 (9th Cir. 1994):
Under the VWPA, the district court has the authority to impose restitution but must first consider the financial resources, financial needs, and earning ability of the defendant. 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3644(a). The court is not required to make factual findings on the defendant's financial condition before imposing restitution. United States v. Cannizzaro, 871 F.2d 809, 810 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 895 (1989). Nevertheless, the record must reflect that the district court had at its disposal information bearing on the defendant's ability to pay. Id. at 811. Additionally, the amount of restitution must be based on "some evidence" that the defendant will be able to pay the amount when required to do so. United States v. Ramilo, 986 F.2d 333, 335 (9th Cir.1993). Although indigency does not preclude imposition of restitution, a defendant who has made a good faith effort at payment but is unable to pay the full amount by the conclusion of sentence may petition the court for an extension of time or for remittitur. United States v. Jackson, 982 F.2d 1279, 1284-85 (9th Cir.1992).
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.