United States v. Pickett, Docket No. 09-0683-cr (2d Cir. July 20, 2010) (found here)
In Dolan v. United States, --- S.Ct. ---, No. 09-367, 2010 WL 2346548 (June 14, 2010), the Supreme Court held that "a sentencing court that misses the 90-day deadline nonetheless retains the power to order restitution . . . where . . . the sentencing court made clear prior to the deadline's expiration that it would order restitution, leaving open (for more than 90 days) only the amount." In doing so, the Supreme Court noted that "the statute seeks primarily to assure that victims of crime receive full restitution," and not "to provide defendants with certainty as to the amount of their liability."
In Pickett, as in Dolan, the district court's judgment made clear prior to the deadline that the court would order restitution, leaving open only the amount -- which was set after the deadline expired. Relying on Dolan, the Second Circuit found in Pickett that the "District Court acted within its authority in ordering restitution ninety-eight days after Pickett's sentencing hearing."