United States v. Richard Ross

MEMORANDUM *

1. Ross argues that restitution was inappropriate because this case involved too many victims and required the “deter-min[ation] [of] complex issues of fact.” 18 U.S.C. § 3663A(c)(3). In his plea deal, Ross “specifically agree[d] to make restitution to the victims in an .amount to be determined at sentencing,” and waived any right to appeal his sentence. While Ross may appeal the amount of restitution awarded, see United States v. Tsosie, 639 F.3d 1213, 1218 (9th Cir.2011); he has knowingly waived his right to appeal the district court’s decision to award restitution in the first…