United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Hector Manuel Enriquez, Also Known As Jesus Baraza-baraza,defendant-appellant, 1 F.3d 1249 (10th Cir. 1993)

Before LOGAN, MOORE, and BRORBY, Circuit Judges.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT^* 

JOHN P. MOORE, Circuit Judge.

Following entry of a plea to the offense of possessing less than fifty kilograms of marijuana with intent to distribute, Mr. Enriquez was sentenced to thirty-seven months in custody. To arrive at that sentence, the district court included a two point upward adjustment of the offense level for obstruction of justice. The only issue presented by this appeal is whether Mr. Enriquez obstructed justice within the meaning of U.S.S.G. Sec. 3C1.1 by using an alias in his initial court appearances. We hold that he did and affirm the sentence.

The record in this case is sparse. The only pertinent documents before us are the indictment and a "Notice of True Name and Request for Amendment of Caption" filed by the defendant. The latter document, filed almost three months after return of the indictment and apparently subsequent to at least two court appearances, acknowledges defendant was "currently listed in this cause under the name of Jesus Baraza-Baraza," but his "true given name" is "Hector Manuel Enriquez." At the time of sentencing, defendant's counsel stated:

[I]t's undisputed that Mr. Enriquez initially used the name Barraza. He apologizes to the Court for that. I simply note that at the very first time that he was confronted with a fingerprint check, he immediately authorized me to file a notice of true name and request for amendment of caption in the case so that there would not be any additional effort or there would be no waste of resources in trying to verify this. He immediately acknowledged it.

And although--although I acknowledge it, my client understands that the giving of a false name certainly can be grounds for an obstruction adjustment, we would urge that it not be applied here, simply because the defendant did come forward and filed the notice of his true name before there had to be anything--any additional efforts to prove that identity, Your Honor.

Notwithstanding this statement, but without explanation, the district court found the defendant had obstructed justice and imposed the two point adjustment required by Sec. 3C1.1. That section provides:

If the defendant willfully obstructed or impeded, or attempted to obstruct or impede the administration of justice during the investigation, prosecution, or sentencing of the instant offense, increase the offense level by 2 levels.