Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1 views

    United States v. Smith, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed Jonathan E. Smith's sentence for drug trafficking and firearms violations imposed by the district court. The Court of Appeals found that the district court's characterization of Smith's statements as "lies" was sufficient to justify a two-level enhancement for obstruction of justice under USSG §3C1.1. Specifically, the Court held that describing statements as "lies" satisfies the concern in United States v. Dunnigan that a finding of perjury requires determining the defendant intended to deceive rather than making inadvertent false statements, as a lie inherently implies an intent to deceive. Therefore, the Court of Appeals affirmed Smith's sentence.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    United States v. Smith, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed Jonathan E. Smith's sentence for drug trafficking and firearms violations imposed by the district court. The Court of Appeals found that the district court's characterization of Smith's statements as "lies" was sufficient to justify a two-level enhancement for obstruction of justice under USSG §3C1.1. Specifically, the Court held that describing statements as "lies" satisfies the concern in United States v. Dunnigan that a finding of perjury requires determining the defendant intended to deceive rather than making inadvertent false statements, as a lie inherently implies an intent to deceive. Therefore, the Court of Appeals affirmed Smith's sentence.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-06-27 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 95-5855

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed Jonathan E. Smith's sentence for drug trafficking and firearms violations imposed by the district court. The Court of Appeals found that the district court's characterization of Smith's statements as "lies" was sufficient to justify a two-level enhancement for obstruction of justice under USSG §3C1.1. Specifically, the Court held that describing statements as "lies" satisfies the concern in United States v. Dunnigan that a finding of perjury requires determining the defendant intended to deceive rather than making inadvertent false statements, as a lie inherently implies an intent to deceive. Therefore, the Court of Appeals affirmed Smith's sentence.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    1 views2 pages

    United States v. Smith, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed Jonathan E. Smith's sentence for drug trafficking and firearms violations imposed by the district court. The Court of Appeals found that the district court's characterization of Smith's statements as "lies" was sufficient to justify a two-level enhancement for obstruction of justice under USSG §3C1.1. Specifically, the Court held that describing statements as "lies" satisfies the concern in United States v. Dunnigan that a finding of perjury requires determining the defendant intended to deceive rather than making inadvertent false statements, as a lie inherently implies an intent to deceive. Therefore, the Court of Appeals affirmed Smith's sentence.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 95-5855

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    JONATHAN E. SMITH, a/k/a John Smith,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Fayetteville. Terrence W. Boyle,
    District Judge. (CR-93-63-BO)
    Submitted:

    June 20, 1996

    Decided:

    June 27, 1996

    Before HALL, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.


    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    William Lee Davis, III, Lumberton, North Carolina, for Appellant.
    Janice McKenzie Cole, United States Attorney, Robert E. Skiver,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Jonathan E. Smith appeals from the district court's imposition
    of his sentence for drug trafficking and firearms violations. We
    affirm.
    Smith's argument centers around his contention that the district court's findings were insufficient to justify a two-level
    enhancement for obstruction of justice pursuant to U.S.S.G.
    3C1.1. He concedes that the district court found that he lied about
    material matters, but contends that a finding of "lying" is insufficient to prove an intent to deceive under United States v.
    Dunnigan, 507 U.S. 87 (1993). The tantamount concern expressed by
    Dunnigan is that prior to applying a 3C1.1 increase for perjury
    to an objecting defendant, the district court must find that the
    defendant's false statements were intended to deceive, as opposed
    to being mere inadvertent falsehoods occasioned by loss of memory.
    We find that the district court's characterization of Smith's
    statements as "lies" satisfies this concern because a lie, by
    definition, implicates an intent to deceive. As Smith has raised no
    other objections to his sentence, we affirm. We dispense with oral
    argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
    presented in the materials before the court and argument would not
    aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like