This month, we discuss United States v. Peña, in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit considered a defendant’s appeal of a two-level sentencing enhancement for obstruction of justice under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines §3C1.1, based upon the defendant’s giving of perjured testimony. More specifically, the court considered whether a district court’s findings discrediting a defendant’s sworn statement in support of a suppression motion were sufficient to satisfy the test articulated in U.S. v. Dunnigan, 507 U.S. 87 (1993), and progeny. Dunnigan holds that perjured testimony can form the basis for a §3C1.1 enhancement where the court makes specific findings of fact sufficient to support a finding of perjury under the law and finds that the defendant willfully perjured himself on a material matter.
In a per curiam opinion by Judges Dennis Jacobs and Rosemary S. Pooler of the Second Circuit and Judge Nelson S. Román of the Southern District of New York (sitting by designation), the court granted defendant’s appeal, finding that his sworn statements, discredited by the district court, did not demonstrate a willful obstruction of justice. The decision delineates the line between a sentencing enhancement that advances valid sentencing goals and one that violates a defendant’s constitutional and statutory rights to testify.
