United States v. Poole

29 F. App'x 140
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 11, 2002
Docket01-4669
StatusUnpublished

This text of 29 F. App'x 140 (United States v. Poole) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth 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. Poole, 29 F. App'x 140 (4th Cir. 2002).

Opinion

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Kimberly Denise Poole appeals her twenty-one month sentence for bank fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 1344 (West 2000). Finding no reversible error, we affirm.

On appeal, Poole claims only that the district court erred by denying her a reduction for acceptance of responsibility pursuant to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3E1.1 (2000). We review a district court’s determination as to whether a defendant is entitled to such a reduction with great deference for clear error. United States v. Nale, 101 F.3d 1000, 1005 (4th Cir.1996).

Because there was evidence that Poole failed to appear at her sentencing hearing and moved without notifying her federal probation officer, in violation of her conditions of release, we cannot conclude that the district court clearly erred in its determination. A defendant who pleads guilty and truthfully admits her conduct may still lose the adjustment through other conduct that is inconsistent with such acceptance of responsibility. USSG § 3E1.1, comment, (n. 3).

Accordingly, we affirm Poole’s conviction and sentence. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

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

Related

United States v. Scott Nale
101 F.3d 1000 (Fourth Circuit, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
29 F. App'x 140, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-poole-ca4-2002.