Court Opinion

ID: 9894552
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-02 00:00:36.620127+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:09:49.837576
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-60010         Document: 00516953115             Page: 1      Date Filed: 11/01/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 23-60010
                                     Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                     ____________                               November 1, 2023
                                                                                  Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Cadrius Baker,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Mississippi
                                USDC No. 3:20-CR-97-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Barksdale, Engelhardt, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Following a bench trial, Cadrius Baker was convicted of: making a
   false statement while acquiring, or attempting to acquire, a firearm; making
   a false statement concerning information in an official record; and possession
   of a firearm by a prohibited person, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(a)(6),

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-60010        Document: 00516953115        Page: 2   Date Filed: 11/01/2023

                                    No. 23-60010

   (n), and 924(a)(1)(A). He contends the district court erred by denying his
   request for a Guideline § 3E1.1 adjustment for acceptance of responsibility.
          Because the sentencing court is in a unique position to evaluate
   defendant’s acceptance of responsibility, great deference is afforded the
   court’s finding:     our court will “affirm the denial of a reduction for
   acceptance of responsibility unless it is without foundation, a standard of
   review more deferential than the clearly erroneous standard”. United States
   v. Lord, 915 F.3d 1009, 1017 (5th Cir. 2019) (citation omitted); see Guideline
   § 3E1.1 cmt. n.5.
          Baker does not meet this standard. The court’s rejection of the
   requested adjustment was based on an implicit adverse credibility finding we
   will not disturb. See United States v. Spires, 79 F.3d 464, 467 (5th Cir. 1996)
   (explaining decisions concerning acceptance of responsibility will almost
   always be upheld because they are heavily dependent on credibility
   determinations).
          AFFIRMED.

                                         2