Opinion ID: 699303
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Kennedy's Enhancement for Perjury

Text: 32 Kennedy asserts that the district court erred in enhancing his sentence pursuant to U.S.S.G. Sec. 3C1.1 11 because there is no objective way to determine whether or not he falsely testified at trial. The district court found, independently of the jury, that Kennedy, committed perjury warranting a two level increase of the base offense because he falsely testified that: Connelly hit him first, he rushed in only to break up the fight, the reason for the altercation was Connelly's failure to take a shower, and he did not see Perez and Devine make phone calls. 33 We review the court's finding that Kennedy falsely testified at trial for clear error. See United States v. Jones, 32 F.3d 1512, 1519-20 (11th Cir.1994). We hold that Kennedy's contention is without merit because Connelly's testimony amply supports the district court's conclusion that Kennedy lied about the events in question. See id. at 1520 (when court independently found that defendant obstructed justice by committing perjury at trial, enhancement under Sec. 3C1.1 was proper); United States v. Dobbs, 11 F.3d 152, 155 (11th Cir.1994) (when defendant's testimony was inconsistent with witness's testimony on a fundamental matter and district judge made independent finding that defendant's testimony was perjurious, enhancement under Sec. 3C1.1 was proper).