The following excerpt is from United States v. Rodriguez, 851 F.3d 931 (9th Cir. 2017):
defendant clearly demonstrates acceptance of responsibility for his offense." U.S.S.G. 3E1.1(a). "A district court's decision about whether a defendant has accepted responsibility is a factual determination reviewed for clear error." United States v. Doe , 778 F.3d 814, 821 (9th Cir. 2015) (quoting United States v. Rosas , 615 F.3d 1058, 1066 (9th Cir. 2010) ). "The determination of the sentencing judge is entitled to great deference on review because of the sentencing judge's unique position to evaluate a defendant's acceptance of responsibility." United States v. Nielsen , 371 F.3d 574, 582 (9th Cir. 2004) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). The defendant bears the burden of demonstrating acceptance of responsibility, United States v. Osinger , 753 F.3d 939, 948 (9th Cir. 2014), and must show "genuine contrition for his acts," United States v. Dhingra , 371 F.3d 557, 568 (9th Cir. 2004). We conclude that the district court did not clearly err in denying the adjustment.
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.