FIL ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T MAY 9, 2012 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO N OT PUBLISH]
IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 12 75 5 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 4 :1 0- cr-0 00 80 -RH-WCS-1
UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee,
ve rs us KEVIN MICHAEL TILCOCK, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l l Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e North ernDis tri ctof F lo rid a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Ma y 9, 2 01 2) Befo re CARNES, WILSON andPRYOR, Ci rcu itJu dg es .PER CURI AM:

Kev in Til co ckap pe al s h is sen te nc e o f 13 5 m on th s o f im pr is on m en t fo r co ns pi rin g t o d is tri bu te ox y co do ne , m etha do ne , andalp razo la m , 21 U.S.C. § 8 46 , po ss es si ng th os e il le ga l dru gs with i nt en t t o d is tri bu te , id . § 8 41 (a)( 1) , (b) (1 )(C) , an d d is tri bu ti ng ox y co do ne , id . Tilc oc k c ha ll en ge s the en ha nc em en t o f hi s se nt en ce fo r ob st ru ct in g ju st ic e, Uni te d S ta te s Se nt en ci ng Gui de li ne s M anua l § 3C 1.1 (Nov . 20 10 ), an d the de ni al of h is reque stto reduc e h is sen te nc e fo r acce pt in g re sp on si bi li ty by pl ead in g g ui lty , id . § 3 E1.1 . W e aff irm. W e rev ie w th e in te rp ret at io n a ndap pl ic at io n o f th e Sen te nc in g Gu id el in es de no vo an d re la te d fi nd in gs of f actforcle ar erro r. Uni te d S ta te s v . Doe, 6 61 F.3d 55 0, 5 65 (11 th Cir . 20 11 ) (o bs tru ct io n o f jus ti ce); Uni te d S ta te s v . Gup ta , 57 2 F.3 d 8 78 , 88 7 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 9) (acc ep tanc e o f res po ns ib il ity ). The fi nd in g tha t a de fen da ntha s n otacce pt edres po ns ib il ity forhi s cr im in al co nduc t i s “ ‘ent it le d t o gr eatde fere nc e o n re vi ew an d s ho ul d n otbe di sturbe d u nl es s i t i s wi th ou t fo un da ti on .’ ” Uni te d S tate s v . Kni gh t, 5 62 F.3d13 14 , 13 22 (11 th Cir . 20 09 ) (quo ti ng Uni te d S ta te s v . Davi s, 8 78 F.2d12 99 , 13 01 (11 th Cir . 19 89 )). The di stric t co urt d idno t err whe n i t en ha nc edTil co ck ’s sen te nc e fo r ob st ru ct in g ju st ic e n orwhenitde ni edhi s re qu es t fo r a reduc ti onof h is sen te nc e fo r acc ep tanc e o f res po ns ib il ity . Duri ng a pr e-s en te nc e h eari ng , Tilc oc k t es ti fie d 2th athe ha d i de nt ifi edJac ob Mas on as the pe rs on who ha d m ad e th e und erco ve r

pu rch as es th atledto th e ch arg es ag ai ns t h im . Tilc oc k a dm it te d t ha t h e h adcal le d Mas on an d h adsai d “ If y ou ’re st il l l iv in g i n Tal laha ss ee, I’ll fin d youan d b eat y ou r as s” ; “ I’ll co m e aft er tha t wh or e o f y ou rs to o” ; an d “ I’ve g ota pi st ol wait in g to o.” Mas on tes ti fie d tha t h e al so ha d re cei ve d t ex t m es sa ge s fr om Til co ckth at st at ed , “ Whe n I s ee you, I’ll ge t you.” The d is tri ctco urt d idno t cl earl y err i n fin di ng th atTil co ckha d i nt en de d t o t hr eat enMas on , see id . § 3 C1 .1 cmt n .4(A) , an d tha t Ti lc oc k “ ha [d ] no t ac cep te d re sp on si bi li ty for h is cri min al co nduc t,” i d. § 3E1 .1 cmt. n .4. W e AFFIRMTil co ck ’s sen te nc e.

3