Tomas Barrios Guzman appeals the sentence he received following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiring to transport illegal aliens for commercial advantage and private financial gain. He asserts that the district court erred in failing to give him a three-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility, in light of his timely admission of the elements of the offense and his apologies for his conduct.

We have reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties and conclude that the district court did not clearly err in denying the reduction. See United States v. Ange-les-Mendoza, 407 F.3d 742, 753 (5th Cir. 2005). “The entry of a guilty plea does not entitle a defendant to a reduction as a matter of right.” United States v. Flucas, 99 F.3d 177, 180 (5th Cir. 1996). Guzman’s statements at sentencing did not show “sincere contrition on [his] behalf’ for the wrongness of his conduct. United States v. Nguyen, 190 F.3d 656, 658 (5th Cir. 1999) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Because Guzman has not shown clear error, we need not address the Government’s contention that our review should be limited to the plain error standard.

*245 The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.