The following excerpt is from United States v. Dehaney, D.C. No. CR 09-1056-DSF, No. 10-50518 (9th Cir. 2011):
Dehaney's testimony was relevant to the prosecution and sentencing of the fraudulent passport count, and it related to the closely related offense of aggravated theft identify, therefore satisfying subsections (A) and (B) of 3C1.1. The district court correctly interpreted 3C1.1 to permit an obstruction of justice enhancement. See United States v. Verdin, 243 F.3d 1174, 1180 (9th Cir. 2001) (on de novo review, rejecting claim that subsection B confined 3C1.1 to obstructive conduct directly related to the offense of conviction). Moreover, the district court's factual
Page 5
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.