United States v. Randall McReynolds

MEMORANDUM

Randall McReynolds appeals his sentence of 92 months imprisonment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the facts of this case, we restate them here only as necessary to explain our decision.

I.

McReynolds first argues that the district court erred by refusing to reduce his offense level by three points for acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1.

The district court denied the downward adjustment after finding that McReynolds had lied about his conduct, not his motive. See United States v. Cantrell, 433 F.3d 1269 , 1279 (9th Cir.2006); United States v. Vance, 62 F.3d 1152, 1159-60 (9th Cir. 1995); United States v. Khang, 36 F.3d 77, 80 (9th Cir.1994). There is ample evidence supporting that finding, and the court did not commit clear error in reaching it. Given this finding, the court did not abuse its discretion by not applying the downward adjustment. See Cantrell, 433 F.3d at 1279.

II.

McReynolds next argues that the district court committed a procedural error by departing upward from a criminal history category of III to a category of IV, due to the under-representation of McReynolds’…