Opinion ID: 71125
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Acceptance of Responsibility Adjustment

Text: 37 Section 3E1.1 of the Sentencing Guidelines provides for up to a three-level downward adjustment to a defendant's offense level [i]f the defendant clearly demonstrates acceptance of responsibility for his offense by assisting authorities in the investigation or prosecution of his own misconduct by timely providing complete information to the government or by timely notifying authorities of his intention to enter a plea of guilty. U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1 (1994). This Court reviews the district court's determination of acceptance of responsibility only for clear error. United States v. Anderson, 23 F.3d 368, 369 (11th Cir.1994). 38 Arguedas contends that he was entitled to a three-level downward adjustment to his offense level because he entered a guilty plea and accepted full responsibility for his acts. An adjustment ... 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) (citing U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1, Application Note 4), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 818, 113 S.Ct. 63, 121 L.Ed.2d 31 (1992). Although Arguedas did plead guilty, he repeatedly made materially false statements to the authorities and to the district court. The district court found that Arguedas's misstatements impeded the investigation and prosecution of his offenses and, accordingly, it enhanced Arguedas's sentence for obstruction of justice. Imposition of that enhancement was not clearly erroneous. 39 AFFIRMED.