Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 10385267
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
United States v. Pierce
No. 10385267 · Decided April 25, 2025
No. 10385267·Ninth Circuit · 2025·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
April 25, 2025
Citation
No. 10385267
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 25 2025
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 24-3915
D.C. No.
Plaintiff - Appellee, 1:23-cr-00239-BLW-1
v.
MEMORANDUM*
TYLER J. PIERCE,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Idaho
B. Lynn Winmill, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 22, 2025**
Before: GRABER, H.A. THOMAS, and JOHNSTONE, Circuit Judges.
Tyler J. Pierce appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the
125-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for distribution
of cocaine and methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1).
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Pierce contends that the district court erred by imposing a two-level
obstruction of justice enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1. We review the district
court’s factual findings for clear error, and its application of the Sentencing
Guidelines to the facts for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Gasca-Ruiz,
852 F.3d 1167, 1170 (9th Cir. 2017) (en banc).
The record shows that Pierce was concerned about evidence on his phone,
and he provided his wife with passwords to his phone and social media accounts
when she requested them. The district court reasonably determined that, even if
the idea came from his wife, Pierce “clearly directed her” and gave her the
information “so that she could implement the kind of jointly agreed upon plan to
destroy the evidence.” Contrary to Pierce’s assertion, the court’s remarks reflect
that it found all the necessary elements of obstruction under § 3C1.1, including
willfulness. See United States v. Flores, 802 F.3d 1028, 1047-48 (9th Cir. 2015);
see also U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 cmt. n.4(D) (one example of covered conduct is
“destroying or concealing or directing or procuring another person to destroy or
conceal evidence that is material to an official investigation or judicial proceeding
. . . or attempting to do so”).
AFFIRMED.
2 24-3915
Plain English Summary
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 25 2025 MOLLY C.
Key Points
01NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 25 2025 MOLLY C.
02COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No.
03Lynn Winmill, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 22, 2025** Before: GRABER, H.A.
04Pierce appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 125-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for distribution of cocaine and methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C.
Frequently Asked Questions
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 25 2025 MOLLY C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for United States v. Pierce in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on April 25, 2025.
Use the citation No. 10385267 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.