United States v. Martin

02-20541Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit19 de mai. de 2003

Abrir fonte

Texto completo

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
May 16, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-20541
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RYAN MARTIN,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-00-CR-456-1
--------------------
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Ryan Martin appeals the judgment of the district court
following his conviction of seventeen counts of mail fraud, three
counts of money laundering, and three counts of wire fraud.
Martin argues that the district court erred in determining that
he had obstructed justice pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 and
adjusting his offense level accordingly.

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 02-20541
-2-
The district court’s conclusion that a defendant obstructed
justice under § 3C1.1 is a factual finding that this court
reviews for clear error. United States v. Martinez, 263 F.3d
436, 441 (5th Cir. 2001). Because Martin adduced no evidence in
the district court to rebut the facts recited in the presentence
report (PSR), the district court was free to adopt these facts
and rely upon them in sentencing Martin. United States v. Vital,
68 F.3d 114, 120 (5th Cir. 1995).
The PSR details Martin’s involvement with the creation of a
false document for presentation to the grand jury. This fact
forms a sufficient basis for the district court’s imposition of
the disputed adjustment. Martin has not shown that the district
court’s findings on this issue are not “plausible in light of the
record as a whole.” United States v. Brown, 7 F.3d 1155, 1159
(5th Cir. 1993) (internal quotations and citation omitted).
Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.