UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-4145

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

FELIX A. ALMONTE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior

District Judge. (1:13-cr-00301-TSE-1)

Submitted: August 20, 2014 Decided: August 25, 2014

Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gregory B. English, ENGLISH LAW FIRM, PLLC, Alexandria, 

Virginia, for Appellant. Dana J. Boente, United States

Attorney, Inayat Delawala, Stephen M. Campbell, Assistant United

States Attorneys, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Felix Almonte was convicted of conspiracy to possess 

and pass counterfeit United States currency and five counts of 

possessing and passing such currency. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 472 

(2012). He was sentenced to twenty-seven months in prison. 

Almonte now appeals, raising two claims. We affirm.

Almonte first contends that the evidence was 

insufficient to support his convictions because the Government 

failed to establish that he knew the bills he possessed and 

passed were counterfeit. We will sustain a jury’s verdict “if 

there is substantial evidence, taking the view most favorable to 

the Government, to support it.” Glasser v. United States, 315 

U.S. 60, 80 (1942). 

Here, there was ample evidence that Almonte knew he 

was passing counterfeit bills. He and others accompanied Sandra

Rodriguez when she obtained the bills from suppliers in New York 

City. The group then traveled south with her. Rodriguez 

determined where they would pass the counterfeit bills. She 

distributed the money to Almonte and others and instructed them 

to use it to purchase small, expensive items. Almonte was seen 

on numerous store videos purchasing such items, often using two 

$100 bills, and typically was seen a short time later on other 

stores’ videos returning the same items for cash. Rodriguez 

testified that she paid conspirators, including Almonte, $100 
3

for every $1000 in counterfeit money that they passed. This 

evidence is sufficient to establish that Almonte knew the bills 

he was passing were counterfeit.

Almonte also objects to the application of a two-level 

enhancement for obstruction of justice based on his perjury at 

trial. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3C1.1 (2013). 

We review the district court’s factual findings regarding an 

enhancement for clear error and its legal conclusions de novo. 

United States v. Osborne, 514 F.3d 377, 387 (4th Cir. 2008). 

The § 3C1.1 enhancement applies to perjury. USSG 

§ 3C1.1 cmt. n.4(B). The adjustment is not applicable merely 

because the defendant testified and subsequently was convicted. 

United States v. Dunnigan, 507 U.S. 87, 95 (1993). Rather, the 

court must find that the defendant gave false testimony under 

oath “concerning a material matter with the willful intent to 

provide false testimony, rather than as a result of confusion, 

mistake, or faulty memory.” Id. at 94.

We conclude that the district court correctly applied 

the enhancement. At trial, a clerk at a Banana Republic store 

in Fairfax County, Virginia, testified that on July 14, 2012, 

Almonte entered the store and passed two $100 bills. The clerk 

thought the bills felt suspicious, and she took them to her 

manager, who was in a back room. Almonte fled the store without 

the bills and without the merchandise he was attempting to 
4

purchase. Rodriguez testified that, when Almonte returned to 

her car, he seemed hurried and said that they had to leave the 

area. 

Almonte testified that he left the store because he 

received a telephone call from Rodriguez, who stated that her 

baby had fallen and they needed to leave for New York. Almonte 

said that they left for New York that day and that thereafter he 

stopped passing currency obtained from Rodriguez because he felt 

there was something wrong with the money. On cross-examination, 

however, photographs were introduced showing that he, Rodriguez 

and coconspirator Diana Vasquez passed counterfeit currency in 

Sterling, Virginia, on July 15, 2012.

Given this testimony, the district court did not 

clearly err in finding that Almonte lied about this incident. 

We conclude that, based on Almonte’s perjury, the § 3C1.1 

enhancement was proper.

We accordingly affirm. We dispense with oral argument 

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented 

in the materials before this court and argument would not aid 

the decisional process.

AFFIRMED