United States v. Garcia-Montero

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 18, 2025
Docket24-50694
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Garcia-Montero (United States v. Garcia-Montero) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Garcia-Montero, (5th Cir. 2025).

Opinion

Case: 24-50694 Document: 73-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/18/2025

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 24-50694 Summary Calendar FILED ____________ September 18, 2025 Lyle W. Cayce United States of America, Clerk

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Manuel Garcia-Montero,

Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:22-CR-684-1 ______________________________

Before Stewart, Graves, and Oldham, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Manuel Garcia-Montero appeals the 42-month within-guidelines sentence imposed by the district court after his guilty plea conviction for illegally reentering the United States. He argues that the district court erred in denying him a reduction for acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1.

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 24-50694 Document: 73-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/18/2025

No. 24-50694

Because he preserved the issue, we review the district court’s denial of a reduction for acceptance of responsibility using “a standard even more deferential than a purely clearly erroneous standard.” United States v. Washington, 340 F.3d 222, 227 (5th Cir. 2003) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The Sentencing Guidelines provide for a two-level reduction to defendant’s base offense level “[i]f the defendant clearly demonstrates acceptance of responsibility for his offense.” § 3E1.1(a). Evidence of defendant’s acceptance of responsibility may be outweighed by conduct inconsistent with such a claim. See § 3E1.1, comment. (n.3). The defendant has the burden of proving his entitlement to the reduction. United States v. Sanchez-Ruedas, 452 F.3d 409, 414-15 (5th Cir. 2006). Here, the record supports the district court’s finding that Garcia- Montero provided false information regarding his true identity. Additionally, he does not dispute that his conduct warranted the obstruction of justice enhancement he received, and, “[o]rdinarily, conduct that results in an enhancement for obstruction of justice [] indicates that the defendant has not accepted responsibility for his criminal conduct.” United States v. Juarez- Duarte, 513 F.3d 204, 211 (5th Cir. 2008) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Accordingly, Garcia-Montero has not shown the district court’s denial of a reduction for acceptance of responsibility was without foundation. See United States v. Lord, 915 F.3d 1009, 1017 (5th Cir. 2019). AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Washington
340 F.3d 222 (Fifth Circuit, 2003)
United States v. Sanchez-Ruedas
452 F.3d 409 (Fifth Circuit, 2006)
United States v. Juarez-Duarte
513 F.3d 204 (Fifth Circuit, 2008)
United States v. Michael Lord
915 F.3d 1009 (Fifth Circuit, 2019)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Garcia-Montero, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-garcia-montero-ca5-2025.