Opinion ID: 3045262
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: issues

Text: The Defendants present ten issues on appeal. After careful consideration of the briefs, the record, and with the benefit of oral argument, we conclude that only the four issues relating to restitution merit discussion. In addition to the four issues, the Defendants contend that the district court erred by: denying a motion to depose Dr. Moor; denying a motion to sever counts relating to Dr. Moor; and denying a motion for a judgment of acquittal on counts 6, 7, 10, 11, 13, 17, 20, 21, 23, and 26. We conclude there is no merit in these contentions and do not address them further in this opinion. Of the four restitution issues, first, the Defendants contend that the district court should have considered Edwards’s financial situation to determine the amount of restitution. Second, the Defendants argue that the district court erred by 7 Case: 11-15953 Date Filed: 09/06/2013 Page: 8 of 23 granting restitution to victims when the counts related to their injuries were dismissed at trial. Third, the Defendants assert that the district court erred by ordering restitution to Jocson for losses caused by an unrelated real estate investment scheme. Fourth, the Defendants contend that the district court lacked sufficient evidence to order restitution for the Caldwells, Colovin, Freeman, Perry, and Wilson.