USA V. ELLEN REICHE, No. 21-30275 (9th Cir. 2022)
Annotate this Case
Defendant, along with an accomplice, surreptitiously approached a remote set of railroad tracks during the midnight hour. Defendant then secretly placed a “shunt” on the tracks to tamper with the rail signaling system and force trains to halt.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the sentence imposed on Defendant, whom a jury convicted of Violence Against Railroad Carriers. The panel held that the district court did not err in applying a sentencing enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. Section 2A5.2(a)(2) for recklessly endangering the safety of a mass transportation vehicle. Disagreeing with Defendant’s argument that she was unaware of the risks posed by the shunt, the panel held that the district court correctly concluded that a reasonable person would understand that unexpectedly stopping a freight train, as it barrels down the tracks, poses an obvious risk of harm.
The panel also held that the district court did not err in denying Defendant a downward sentencing adjustment for acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. Section 3E1.1(a). The panel wrote that the district court recognized that Defendant’s decision to go to trial did not necessarily bar her from receiving a sentencing reduction but determined that she had not shown genuine acceptance of responsibility. The panel concluded that the district court did not abuse its discretion in making this determination.
Court Description: Criminal Law. The panel affirmed the sentence imposed on Ellen Reiche whom a jury convicted of Violence Against Railroad Carriers in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1992(a)(5), in a case in which Reiche, in order to stop an incoming train carrying crude oil and strike a blow against the fossil fuel industry, secretly placed a shunt on railroad tracks to tamper with the rail signaling system. The panel held that the district court did not err in applying a sentencing enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2A5.2(a)(2) for recklessly endangering the safety of a mass transportation vehicle. Disagreeing with Reiche’s argument that she was unaware of the risks posed by the shunt, the panel held that the district court correctly concluded that a reasonable person would understand that unexpectedly stopping a freight train, as it barrels down the tracks, poses an obvious risk of harm. The panel also held that the district court did not err in denying Reiche a downward sentencing adjustment for acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(a). The panel wrote that the district court recognized that Reiche’s decision to go to trial did not necessarily bar her from receiving a sentencing reduction but determined that she had not shown genuine acceptance of responsibility. The panel concluded that the district court did not abuse its discretion in making this determination.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.