Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinionshould not * be publishe d and is not precedent except under the limited circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 09- 10641 Su m m ar yC al endar UN I TE D S TA TE S OF AM ERI CA, P l ai n t i f f

- A pp el l ee v. AM Y C AT HERI NE TAYL OR , D e fe nda nt - Appe l l ant

A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f or t h e N ort h ernD i st ri ctof T exas U SD C N o. 4: 08- C R
- 186- 2 B ef ore B E N AV ID E S , P R A D O , an d S O U T H W IC K , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IA M: * Am y Cat he r i ne Tay l o ra ppe al s t he 2 4- m o nt h s e nt e nc e i m po s e d f o l l o w i ng he rg ui l t y pl e a c o nvi c t i o n f o r at t e m pt i ng t o pa s s a c o unt e r fe i t e d o bli ga t i o n o f t he U ni t e d St at e s . Tay l o rar gue s t hatt he di s t r i c tc o ur tw r o ngly c o nc l ude d t hats he wa s n o te n t i t l e dt o ar e d u c t i o n f o ra c c e p t a n c e o f

r e s p o n s ib i l i t yu n d e rU. S . S . G. § 3 E 1. 1. Sh e as se r t s t hat she f ul l y di sc l os ed allr el evanti nf or m at i on and t hat she w as n ot requ i red t o vol u n t eer or ad m i t af f i rm ativel y rel ev a n t co n du ct beyo nd t he o f

fens e o f c onvi c t i on. She c ont ends t hatherc as e i s ext r aor di nary, United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D June 1, 20 10 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk Case: 09-10641 Document: 00511127770 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/01/2010N o. 09- 10641

2 an d sh e th e re f

ore s h ou l d h ave been gran t ed a redu ct i on f or acc eptan ce of responsibi l i t y even t h ou gh she al so received an en h an cem en tf or obst ructi on of j u st i ce. Ad e fe n d a n t’s o ffe n s e le v e l m a yb e re d u c e db ya s m a n ya s th r e e le v e ls if th e d e fe n d a n t “ c le a r lyd e m o n s tr a te s a c c e p ta n c e o f resp o n s ib ilityfo rh is o ffe n s e .” § 3E 1. 1. C on du ctres u l t i n g i n an enh an ce m e n t f or obst ructi on of

j u st i ce “o r d in a r ilyin d ic a te s th a t t h e d e fe n d a n t h a s n o t a c c e p te dre s p o n s ib ilityfo rh is c r i m i nalc onduct . ” § 3E 1. 1, c om m ent . (n. 4) . H ow eve r , a de fendantc an r ec eive a dju s tm e n ts u n d e rb o th § § 3 C 1 .1 a n d3 E 1 .1 in a n “e x tr a o r d in a r y” c a s e . I d. We revi ew a deter m i n ati on of a cceptan ce of res pon sibi l i t y w i t h even great er defer en ce t h an u n der a cl earl y erroneou s s t an da rd; t h e di st ri ctcourt ’ s r u l i n g on ac c e pt anc e o f

r e s po ns ibil i t y “ s ho ul d notb e di s t urbe d un l e s s i ti s w i t ho ut fou n d a ti on . ” Uni t e d St at e s v . W as hi ngt o n, 340 F. 3d 222, 227 ( 5t h C i r. 20 0 3) (in te r n a l cit a tio n s a n dq u o ta tio n s o m itt e d). T h e rec ord sup ports t h at T aylorw as not f u l l y f ort h com i n g concerni n g h er k n o w le d g e o f r e le v a n t c o n d u c t. T h e r e c o r ds p e c ific a llys h o w s th a t T a y lo rfa ls e ly den i ed k n ow i n g t h at c ou n t erf ei tbi l l s w ere bei n g m an u fact u red i n her hom e, di si n gen u ou sly sug gest ed t hatthec o unt e r f e i tbi l l s used i n her of fen se or i gi n ated f rom a source ot h er t h an her hom e, an d ref u sed t o el aborate on circum st an ces s u r r o u n d in gh e ro ffe n s e . S ee § 3E 1. 1, com m en t . (n n . 1 & 3 ); Uni t e d S t at e s v. Nevarez-A rreo la , 8 8 5 F .2 d2 4 3 , 2 4 6 (5 t h C ir . 1 9 8 9 ) ( n o t in gth a td e fe n d a n t ’s fai l u re t o el aborate on t h e ci rcum st an ces surroun di n g of fen se m ay be consi dered inev a lu a tin gd e fen d a n t’ s s in ce rityincla im in ga cc e p ta n ce of re sp o n sib il ity). Un i t ed Stat es v. P i erc e , 237 F . 3d693 , 695 ( 5th C i r. 200 1) (h ol di n g t h at di st ri ct c o u r t p r o p e r lyd e n ie da c c e p ta n c e o f r e s p o n s ib ilityw h e r e d e fe n d a n t fa ls e ly de ni e d r e l e va ntc o nduc t) . The r e c o r d a l s o i ndi c at e s t hatTay l o rr e f us e d t o a c c e pt pe r s o nalr e s po ns ibil i t y f o rt he c i r c um s t anc es l e ad i ng t o he rc o nvi c t i o n, a nd in s te a da tt e m p te dto im p e d e h e rp r o s e c u tio n b ya tt a c k in gG o v e r n m e n t o ffic ia ls a n daccu singthe m of b eh a vi ng m a l i ci ou sly. T a ylor furth erm ore h a s n ot set f orth Case: 09-10641 Document: 00511127770 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/01/2010N o. 09- 10641

3 anyg r o unds upo n whi c h we c an c o nc l ude t hathe rc as e i s “ e xt r ao r di nar y” a nd th a t sh e sh ou l dbe gra n teda re d u cti on f or a ccep tan ce of resp on sibi l i ty d esp i te r e c e ivi ng an upwar d a dj us t m e ntf o ro bs t r uc t i o n o f

j us t i c e fo rhero bs t r e pe r o us c o n d u c t. S ee§ 3 E 1 .1 , co m m e n t. (n .4 ). A c c o r d in g ly , th e d is tr i c tc o u r tp r o p e r ly det e r m i ne d t hat Tay l o r w as no t e nt it l e d t o a r e duc t i o n f o r ac c e ptan ce of r es ponsibi l i t y. T a y l o ra l s o a r g u e s t h a t t h e d i s t r i c tc o u r tp l a i n l ye r r e db yu s i n gU. S . S . G. § 2B 5. 1 to determ i n e h e r b ase of fen se l evel . Sh e asser t s t h at § 2B 5. 1 ap pl i es o nl y w he r e c o unt e r fe i t e d o bj e c t s ha ve b e e n fal s e l y m ad e i n t he i re nt i r e t y, a nd th a t he r off

en se inv olved ge n u i n e n otes th a t w ere a l tered . S h e th ere fore a sse rts t hat her bas e of

fens e l eve l sho ul d have bee n det er m i ned und er U . S. S. G . § 2B 1. 1. Th e G ove r nm entc onc ede s t hatt he di st r i c tc our ts houl d have ut i l i ze d § 2B 1. 1, r a t h e rth a n u n d e r§ 2 B 5 .1 , a n dth a tth e d is t r i c tc o u r t ’s e r r o ra ffe c t e dT a y lo r ’s s u b s ta n tia l rig h ts . H o w e v e r , th e G o v e r n m e n t a r g u e s t h a t t h is co u r t s h o u ld d e c lin e to e x e r c is e it s d is c r e tio n t o c o r r e c t th e e r r o rb e c a u s e it d idn o t s e r io u s ly a ffe c t t h e fa ir n e s s , in te g r ityo rp u b lic re p u ta tio n o f ju d ic ia l p r o c e e d in g s . B e c a u s e th is is s u e is r a is e d fo r th e fir s t tim e o n a p p e a l, r e v ie w is fo rp la in e r r o r . S ee Uni t e d S t at e s v. Al v a r a d o - Sa n t i lano , 4 34 F . 3d 794 , 795 ( 5th C i r. 200 5) . T o sh ow pl ai n err or, T aylorm u stshow a f orf ei t ed errort h at i s c l ear or o b v io u s a n d t h a t a ffe c ts h e rs u b s ta n tia l rig h ts . P u cket tv. Un i t ed S t ate s , 129 S. Ct . 1 42 3, 1 42 9 ( 20 09 ) . I f T aylorm ake s s uc h as ho w i ng, t hi s c o ur tha s t he di sc re tion to corr ectt h e err or but onl y i f i tser i ou sly af

fect s t h e fai rness, in te g r ity , o rp u b licre p u ta tio n o f ju d ic ia l p r o c e e d in g s . I d. The r e c o r d i ndi c at e s t hat t he c o unt e r fe i t bil l s i n t hi s c as e w e r e fal s e hi ghden om i n ati on notes t h at began as ge nui nes m all

- den om i n ati on notes, an d w h i ch w ere m odi f

i ed throug h bl each i n g an d repri n t i n g. Th u s, becau se t h e bi l l s w ere al t ered notes r ather t h an notes t h at w ere m ad e i n t h ei r entiret y, t h e di st ri ct c o u r t s h o u ldh a v e a p p lie d§ 2 B 1 .1 , ra th e rth a n § 2 B 5 .1 . SeeUni t e d S t at e s v. D i son , 3 3 0 F . A p p ’x5 6 , 5 9 -6 3 (5t h C ir. 2 0 0 9 ); Un i t ed S t ate s v. O w en , 347 Case: 09-10641 Document: 00511127770 Page: 3 Date Filed: 06/01/2010N o. 09- 10641

4 F. A pp’ x 69, 72- 73 ( 5t h C i r . 2009) . The di s t r i c tco ur t ’ s appli c at i o n of t he w r o ng g u id e li n e w a s e rr o r th a t w a s c le a ro r o b v iou s in li g h t of D i son a nd O w en . S ee D i son , 330 F. A pp’ x at59- 63; O w en , 347 F . A pp ’ x at 72- 73. A l t h ou gh t h ose c ases w a s d e c i d e da f

t e rT a y l o rw a s s e n t e n c e d , t h e e r r o rn e e do n l yb e p l a i n a tt h e t i me o f a p p e lla te co n s id e r a tio n . S ee Un i t ed S t ate s v . G ree n , 29 3 F . 3 d88 6 , 89 0 ( 5 th C ir . 2 0 0 2 ). M o re o v e r, b e ca u se th e d istr ict co u rt’s er ro r c a u se dth e i m p o sition of a sentence t h at w as substan t i al l y h i gh er t h an t h e cor rectadv i sory gui del i n es r a n g e , T a y lo rh a s s h o w n ar e a s o n a b le p r o b a b il it yth a t , b u tfo rth e d is t r ic tc o u r t ’s m is a p p lic a tio n o f th e G u id e lin e s , s h e w o u ldh a v e re c e iv e dale s s e rs e n te n c e . S ee Un i t ed S t ate s v. Ja sso , 5 8 7 F .3 d 7 0 6 , 7 1 3 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 9 ); Uni t e d S t at e s v. Vi l lega s , 4 0 4 F .3 d3 5 5 , 3 6 5 (5 t h C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . C o n t r a r yto th e G o v e r n m e n t ’s argu m en t , t h i s er ror seri ou sly af fect s t h e fai rnes s , int e gri t y, or pu bl i c r epu t ati on o f ju d ic ia l p r o c e e d in g s . Se eUni t e d St at e s v . Jo hn , 597 F . 3d 263 , 285
- 89 (5t h C i r. 2010) ;Vi l legas , 4 04 F . 3da t3 64
- 65 . Ac c o r di ngly, w e v ac at e s e nt e nc e a nd r e m a n dfo rre s e n te n c in g . S ENT ENC E VA CA T ED ; C AS E RE M AND ED . Case: 09-10641 Document: 00511127770 Page: 4 Date Filed: 06/01/2010