Opinion ID: 75841
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: loss of acceptance of responsibility reduction

Text: 18 Finally, under the Sentencing Guidelines, a defendant may receive a two-level or a three-level reduction in his offense level if he accepts responsibility for his offense(s) in a timely manner. U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1. We review the district court's determination of acceptance of responsibility only for clear error. United States v. Dodd, 111 F.3d 867, 870 (11th Cir.1997). A district court's determination that a defendant is not entitled to acceptance of responsibility will not be set aside unless the facts in the record clearly establish that a defendant has accepted personal responsibility. United States v. Sawyer, 180 F.3d 1319, 1323 (11th Cir.1999). 19 In the instant case, we cannot say that the district court committed clear error in denying Singh a reduction in his adjusted offense level for accepting responsibility for his crimes or that the record clearly establishes that Singh has fully accepted personal responsibility for his crimes. As noted supra, the district court did not err in finding that Singh committed perjury when he testified at his sentencing hearing or in finding that Singh only admitted to a minor part of his crimes. 20 Conduct resulting in an enhancement under § 3C1.1 ... ordinarily indicates that the defendant has not accepted responsibility for his criminal conduct, U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1, comment. (n. 4), and [a]n adjustment under the guidelines for acceptance of responsibility is not warranted when a defendant's conduct results in an enhancement for obstruction of justice. United States v. Kramer, 943 F.2d 1543, 1547 n. 4 (11th Cir.1991). Here, Singh willfully testified falsely at his sentencing hearing, and no extraordinary circumstances exist which would justify applying adjustments under both U.S.S.G. §§ 3C1.1 and 3E1.1. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's decision not to grant Singh a reduction in his adjusted offense level, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1, for acceptance of responsibility. 21 For these reasons, we affirm Singh's sentence as imposed by the district court. 22 AFFIRMED.