IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-10971 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MICHAEL DARNELL TRIBBLE,

Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (4:00-CR-293-3-A) -------------------- February 28, 2002

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Defendant-Appellant Michael Darnell Tribble appeals his

sentence following his jury-trial conviction for bank robbery, in

violation of

(a). Tribble contends that the

district court did not make the specific findings required to

justify the imposition of a two-level increase in his offense level

for obstruction of justice pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1, based on

his alleged perjury. Tribble contends that the district court did

not specify the testimony that it found to be false.

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. We review the district court’s factual finding that a

defendant has obstructed justice under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 for clear

error. United States v. Storm,

(5th Cir. 1994).

Because Tribble objected to the obstruction enhancement for

perjury, the district court was required to “review the evidence

and make independent findings necessary to establish a willful

impediment to or obstruction of justice, or an attempt to do the

same, under the perjury definition.” United States v. Como,

(5th Cir. 1995) (citing United States v. Dunnigan,

(1993)). Separate and clear findings on each element

of the alleged perjury are not required. See Como,

.

The district court’s statement at sentencing and the adoption

of the second presentence report addendum which specifically

delineated those portions of Tribble’s testimony that were

contradictory to those of the testifying codefendants were

sufficient to justify the obstruction-of-justice enhancement. See

United States v. Cabral-Castillo,

(5th Cir. 1994).

AFFIRMED. S:\OPINIONS\UNPUB\01\01-10971.0.wpd 4/29/04 2:25 pm

2