United States v. Lawal , 235 F. App'x 320 ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                                                                United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    F I L E D
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT      August 13, 2007
    Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    No. 06-20394
    Summary Calendar
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    ADESHINA OLANREWAJU LAWAL
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Texas
    USDC No. 4:04-CR-517-ALL
    Before HIGGINBOTHAM, STEWART, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Adeshina Olanrewaju Lawal appeals his convictions and sentences for
    attempting bank fraud, possessing a forged or counterfeit security, and aiding
    and abetting the same. He argues that the district court erred by denying his
    requested jury instruction on the defense of entrapment; enhancing his sentence
    for obstruction of justice; and enhancing his sentence because a substantial
    portion of his fraudulent scheme occurred outside of the United States.
    *
    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    should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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.
    No. 06-20394
    The district court was not required to instruct Lawal’s jury on the defense
    of entrapment.    Although Lawal’s trial testimony indicated that he was
    pressured by a Government informant during the course of his offense, Lawal
    unequivocally stated that he agreed to participate in the offense only after a
    third party threatened his life. Lawal did not make a prima facie showing of
    evidence sufficient to support a reasonable jury's finding of entrapment.
    See United States v. Ogle, 
    328 F.3d 182
    , 185-88 (5th Cir. 2003).
    The district court did not err by enhancing Lawal’s sentence pursuant to
    U.S.S.G.§ 3C1.1 for obstruction of justice. The district court’s finding that
    Lawal’s sworn post-arrest statement and Lawal’s trial testimony were
    inconsistent was plausible in light of the record as a whole. See United States
    v. Creech, 
    408 F.3d 264
    , 270 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 
    126 S. Ct. 777
     (2005).
    Committing perjury is conduct for which the enhancement may be applied. Id.
    at 270-71; § 3C1.1, comment. (n.4(b)).
    Finally, the district court did not err by enhancing Lawal’s sentence
    pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(9)(B), based on a finding that a substantial part
    of his fraudulent scheme was committed from outside the United States. The
    finding was plausible in light of the record read as a whole.
    AFFIRMED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-20394

Citation Numbers: 235 F. App'x 320

Judges: Higginbotham, Owen, Per Curiam, Stewart

Filed Date: 8/13/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/2/2023