Chigbolu
United States v. Chigbolu
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM ***
Isioma Patrick Chigbolu (“Chigbolu”) appeals his sentence following his guilty plea to one count of receiving and retaining stolen U.S. treasury checks in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 510 (b); using a means of identification of another person in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028 (a)(7); using unauthorized access devices in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029 (a)(2); possessing 15 or more unauthorized access devices in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029 (a)(8); possessing stolen mail in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1708 ; and two counts of bank fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we remand.
The district court enhanced Chigbolu’s sentence after finding that there was a loss of approximately $280,065.84, more than one victim and more than minimal planning. On appeal, for the first time, Chigbolu argues that the district court violated his Sixth Amendment rights because he did not consent to judicial factfinding and the enhancements were based on facts that he never admitted and that were never proven to a jury. Accordingly, we review for plain error. United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc).