United States v. Henry Stuckey

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 21 2013 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 12-10456 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 2:11-cr-00021-PMP v. MEMORANDUM* HENRY STUCKEY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Philip M. Pro, District Judge, Presiding Submitted May 14, 2013** Before: LEAVY, THOMAS, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges. Henry Stuckey appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 137-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1241; wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343; and * 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). simple assault, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 111(a)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Stuckey contends that the district court erred by denying him a three-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1. We review for clear error the district court’s decision to deny a reduction for acceptance of responsibility. See United States v. Fleming, 215 F.3d 930, 939 (9th Cir. 2000). The district court did not clearly err in declining to grant a reduction for acceptance of responsibility because the record reflects that, during the sentencing hearing, Stuckey sought to minimize the extent of his criminal culpability and fraudulent intent. See id. at 940 (concluding that a defendant who “maintained that he acted with an empty head but a pure heart” did not accept responsibility for his offense). AFFIRMED. 2 12-10456