Opinion ID: 588253
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: obstruction of justice guidelines increase

Text: In reviewing a district court's sentence, we will accord due deference to the trial court's application of the United States Sentencing Guidelines to the facts. United States v. Bianco, 922 F.2d 910, 911 (1st Cir. 1991). The government has the burden of proving upward adjustments in offense levels by a preponderance of the evidence. United States v. Sklar, 920 F.2d 107, 112 (1st Cir. 1990). On appeal, reversal will only occur in cases where clear error is present. United States v. Wright, 873 F.2d 437, 444 (1st Cir. 1989). Section 3C1.1 of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines provides for a two level increase when a defendant willfully obstructed or impeded, or attempted to obstruct or impede, the administration of justice during the investigation, prosecution, or sentencing of the relevant offense. The trial court applied the two level increase because it found that the defendant had perjured himself on the stand. For instance, on the stand the defendant declared that his two pharmacies were financially sound, when in fact the documentary evidence showed otherwise; he also claimed that he did not gain money from his kiting scheme, when the bank officials presented contradictory evidence of his financial benefits. Thus, there was a preponderance of evidence which demonstrated that Mason obstructed justice when he perjured himself at the trial, and the defendant's claim is without support. United States v. Rehal, 940 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1991) (district court not required to specify those portions of a defendant's testimony it believes to have been falsified, so long as the finding of untruthfulness is sufficiently supported by the record).