United States v. Tayo Ogunbanke

MEMORANDUM

Defendant-appellant, Tayo Ogunbanke, appeals the sentence imposed by the district court following his conviction of one count of access device fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029 . Exercising jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3742 and 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , we affirm Ogunbanke’s sentence.

1. Ogunbanke first asserts the district court erred in calculating his advisory guidelines range. He argues the government failed to prove that a substantial part of the fraudulent scheme in which he 'was involved was committed from outside the United States and, thus, the district court erroneously applied a two-level enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2Bl.l(b)(10)(B). We review a district court’s interpretation of the Sentencing Guidelines de novo. United States v. Hornbuckle, 784 F.3d 549, 553 (9th Cir.2015). Findings of fact are reviewed for clear error. Id.

2. Because the Sentencing Guidelines do not define “substantial,” we look to the dictionary for the plain meaning of the term. United States v. Flares, 729 F.3d 910, 914 (9th Cir.2013). The definitions of “substantial” relevant to § 2Bl.l(b)(10)(B) include: “an important material matter, thing, or part,” Webster’s Third…