Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
No. 09-4877
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
T. S. Ellis, III, Senior
District Judge. (1:09-cr-00047-TSE-1)
Submitted:
Decided:
PER CURIAM:
A jury convicted Appellant Henry Obilo of conspiracy
to commit bank fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1349 (2006).
Obilo appeals his conviction, challenging the sufficiency of the
evidence and the propriety of the jury instructions.
He also
For
When a defendant
found
the
essential
reasonable doubt.
elements
of
the
crime
beyond
(1942); United States v. Cameron, 573 F.3d 179, 183 (4th Cir.
2009).
This
court
substantial evidence.
must
sustain
verdict
supported
by
government
agreement
must
among
prove
the
the
following
defendants
to
elements:
commit
an
(1)
illegal
an
act;
Cir. 1987).
At trial, three of Obilos coconspirators testified as
to the existence of the conspiracy and described the complex
methods it used to achieve its goal of stealing funds from high
balance
home
identified
conspiracy.
enforcement
equity
Obilo
lines
and
Further,
officer
of
credit.
described
two
of
his
the
identified
The
witnesses
involvement
coconspirators
Obilos
voice
also
with
and
on
the
law
recorded
this
evidence
establishes
reasonable doubt.
Obilos
guilt
beyond
conspiracy
district
courts
instruction.
decision
to
This
give
or
court
refuse
to
reviews
give
the
jury
577 F.3d 207, 221 (4th Cir. 2009), cert. denied, 130 S. Ct. 1551
(2010).
multiple
conspiracy
instruction
is
not
required
charged
Squillacote,
quotation
221
marks
in
F.3d
and
the
indictment.
542,
574
citation
(4th
United
Cir.
omitted).
We
States
v.
2000)
(internal
have
thoroughly
Thus,
we
conclude
the
district
court
correctly
This court
38, 51 (2007); see also United States v. Pauley, 511 F.3d 468,
473-74 (4th Cir. 2007).
court
must:
(1)
properly
calculate
the
Guidelines
range;
the
district
court
followed
the
necessary
3553(a)
a
variant
and
the
sentence
that
was
parties
twenty
arguments,
months
below
it
the
the
foregoing
courts judgment.
facts
and
materials
legal
before
reasons,
we
affirm
the
district
court
are
adequately
and
argument
presented
would
not
in
the
aid
the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED