discussed Cited as authority (quoted) United States v. Weimer he mvra requires that the court impose 'full' restitution, plus interest, for certain offenses regardless of the financial condition of the defendant.

cited Cited "see" United States v. Sacramento Hinojosa-Perez See United States v. Lazarevich, 147 F.3d 1061, 1065 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 975 , 119 S.Ct. 432 , 142 L.Ed.2d 352 (1998).

discussed Cited "see" State v. DeAngelis See United States v. Dean, 949 F.Supp. 782, 786 (D.Or.1996) ("Where the amount of restitution is geared directly to the amount of the victim's loss ... proportionality is already built into the order."), aff'd, United States v. Dubose, 146 F. 3d 1141, 1145 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 975 , 119 S.Ct. 430 , 142 L.Ed. 2d 350 (1998).

discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Harris (2×) See also United States v. Lopez, 153 F.3d 723 (4th Cir.), cert' denied 525 U.S. 975 , 119 S.Ct. 431 , 142 L.Ed.2d 351 (1998)(defendant indicted for a second conspiracy for his post-arrest activities while out on bond; court adopted reasoning of Asher and Dunn to find defendant's involvement in first conspiracy ended with arrest and conviction such that they could be subjected to prosecution for any further involvement in the on-going conspiracy); United States v. Romero, 967 F.2d 63, 68 (2d Cir.1992)(defendant not subjected to double jeopardy when tried for conspiracy to violate federal narcot…