United States v. Warner
This text of 318 F. App'x 454 (United States v. Warner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Thomas Alen Warner, Sr. appeals from the ten-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for mail fraud and false statements, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2(b), 1001, and 1341. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we vacate and remand.
Warner contends that the district court erred by not applying a two-level downward adjustment for acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. § 3El.l(a). We conclude that the district court did not err because Warner’s statements during his plea and sentencing colloquies, as well as the timing of his admissions, were inconsistent with acceptance of responsibility. See United States v. Scrivener, 189 F.3d 944, 948-49 (9th Cir.1999); see also U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1, cmt. n. 1(h) (2002).
Warner also contends that his sentence is unreasonable because the district court ignored his history and characteristics when fashioning the sentence. We conclude that there was no procedural error and that Warner’s sentence is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 995-96 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc).
Finally, Warner contends that a special condition of supervised release prohibiting him from filing any claim for a refund of taxes after filing initial returns should be vacated because it is not reasonably related to his offense, and it is it not narrowly tailored to be the least restrictive as possible. We conclude that this condition as written is not reasonably related to the sentencing factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See United States v. Betts, 511 F.3d 872, 876-81 (9th Cir.2007).
VACATED and REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
318 F. App'x 454, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-warner-ca9-2008.