United States v. Lujan-Sauceda

187 F.3d 451, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 20091, 1999 WL 649076
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedAugust 25, 1999
Docket98-50896
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 187 F.3d 451 (United States v. Lujan-Sauceda) 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. Lujan-Sauceda, 187 F.3d 451, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 20091, 1999 WL 649076 (5th Cir. 1999).

Opinion

PATRICK E. HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judge:

Appellant Denise Lujan-Sauceda pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute for carrying over 80 pounds of marijuana in her car. Her initial presen-tence report included a three-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility. Lu-jan-Sauceda then failed to appear at her sentencing hearing, and a warrant was issued for her arrest. She later turned herself in. At her second sentencing hearing, her offense level was revised to remove the three-level reduction and to include a two-level upward adjustment for obstruction of justice. Lujan-Sauceda argues on appeal that the district court erred in denying offense level reductions for acceptance of responsibility and for a minor or minimal role in the offense.

The denied requested reduction for acceptance of responsibility, addressed in section 3E1.1 of the Sentencing Guidelines, results from the obstruction of justice adjustment. The Comment to section 3E1.1 notes, “Conduct resulting in an enhance *452 ment under § 3C1.1 [Obstructing or Impeding the. Administration of Justice] ordinarily indicates that the defendant has not accepted responsibility for his criminal conduct. There may, however, be extraordinary cases in which adjustments under both §~ 3C1.1 and 3E1.1 may apply." § 3E1.1 n.4. In this case, Lujan-Sauceda's eventual voluntary surrender does not present such an extraordinary circumstance.

The district court did not err in denying Lujan-Sauceda a downward adjustment for a minimal or minor role in the offense. Lujan-Sauceda was the only actor in her offense and the court used only the drugs she was transporting in calculating her sentence. Appellant's status as a first-time offender and her claims to be a courier do not require a different result.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

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

Related

United States v. JB McAfee
Fifth Circuit, 2019
United States v. Eduardo Ramirez
706 F. App'x 217 (Fifth Circuit, 2017)
United States v. Ruperto Valle-Porcallo
475 F. App'x 515 (Fifth Circuit, 2012)
United States v. Mark Wagner
394 F. App'x 84 (Fifth Circuit, 2010)
United States v. Stetzel
183 F. App'x 432 (Fifth Circuit, 2006)
United States v. Prieto
Fifth Circuit, 2002
United States v. Collums
Fifth Circuit, 2001
United States v. Venegas
Fifth Circuit, 2001
United States v. Dotson
Fifth Circuit, 2000
United States v. McDaniel
Fifth Circuit, 2000
United States v. Shavers
Fifth Circuit, 2000
United States v. Green
Fifth Circuit, 1999

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
187 F.3d 451, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 20091, 1999 WL 649076, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-lujan-sauceda-ca5-1999.