The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
15-30033•United States of America v. Eugenia Ann Rowland
15-30033Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNov 23, 2015
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
EUGENIA ANN ROWLAND,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 15-30033
D.C. No. 1:14-cr-00027-SPW
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Susan P. Watters, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 18, 2015**
Before: TASHIMA, OWENS, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Eugenia Ann Rowland appeals from the district court’s judgment and
challenges the 264-month sentence imposed following her guilty-plea conviction
for second degree murder, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1111(a). We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
NOV 23 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
-- 1 of 2 --
2 15-30033
Rowland contends that the district court erred by applying an obstruction of
justice enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 because her false statements to law
enforcement did not impede the discovery of the victim’s body and, therefore,
were not material. We review de novo the district court's application of an
enhancement under section 3C1.1. See United States v. Manning, 704 F.3d 584,
585 (9th Cir. 2012) (per curiam). It is undisputed that Rowland falsely told law
enforcement that, on the night that the victim was last seen alive, Rowland
witnessed the victim depart in a vehicle with an unknown male. Testimony
presented at the sentencing hearing established that Rowland’s false statements
impeded the investigation of the offense, even if they did not prevent or delay the
discovery of the body. Contrary to Rowland’s contention, the district court
properly applied the enhancement. See U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 cmt. n.4(G); Manning,
704 F.3d at 587 (“concoct[ing] a story” may be treated as an obstruction of
justice).
AFFIRMED.
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.