Dringle

United States v. Dringle

Good Law
43 F. App'x 112
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 30, 2002No. 01-30177; D.C. No. CR-00-00083-JWSCalifornia465 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Reece T. Dringle appeals the 24-month sentence imposed after her guilty-plea conviction for one count of making, uttering, and possessing counterfeited private securities, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 513 (a). We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3742 , and we affirm.

Dringle contends that the district court erred in applying a two-level upward adjustment to her offense level for obstruction of justice under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1. She argues the court erred by finding that letters she forged and submitted to the court for consideration at sentencing were material to the outcome of the sentence. Dringle also alleges the court erred by imposing the adjustment without a finding of willfulness. We review the district court’s imposition of a sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 for clear error, United States v. Lofton, 905 F.2d 1315, 1316 (9th Cir.1990), and we find none.

The district court did not clearly err in its finding of materiality. As the court noted, if it had believed the forged letter from Brigette Dringle-Lechner to be true, this would have influenced the outcome of the sentence. See United States v. Maganar-Guerrero, 80 F.3d 398 , 400 (9th Cir.1996).…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.