1

The Honorable Thomas M. Shanahan, United States District

Judge for the District of Nebraska.

___________

No. 95-3858

___________

United States of America, *

 *

Appellee, *

 * Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

 * District of Nebraska.

Anthony Okereke, * [UNPUBLISHED]

 *

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: February 6, 1996

 Filed: February 14, 1996 ___________

Before McMILLIAN, WOLLMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. ___________

PER CURIAM.

Anthony Okereke challenges the 10-month sentence imposed by

the district court1 after he pleaded guilty to conspiring to commit

bank fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371. We affirm.

In February 1995, Okereke and Emeka Okonkwo traveled from Los

Angeles to Omaha, where they attempted to open a number of bank

accounts in the names of Preon Booth (Okereke) and Donald Bronson

(Okonokwo). Because of difficulties in verifying the information

provided by "Booth" and "Bronson," the banks "blocked the accounts"

and notified the Secret Service. On March 15, the Secret Service

was informed that "Bronson" was at one of the banks. Law

enforcement officers dispatched to the bank found Okonkwo inside

and Okereke outside, waiting in a car with a bag containing, inter

alia, "scores of checks in the names of other persons," and
-2-

counterfeit checks payable to "Booth" and "Bronson." Sixty-seven

checks were seized, fourteen of which were written for amounts

totalling more than $58,000.

At sentencing, Okereke argued he was entitled to a three-level

reduction under U.S.S.G. § 2X1.1(b)(2), as he neither completed all

of the acts necessary for the commission of the subject offense nor

was he about to complete all such acts but for his apprehension.

Okereke submitted his affidavit, attesting that he and Okonkwo came

to Omaha in February to open the bank accounts, supplying the banks

with fictitious information; that they returned the next month to

present fraudulent checks for deposit and to make withdrawals

against the deposited checks; and that upon learning that the

accounts had been blocked, they visited the banks only to withdraw

the funds they had originally deposited in February.

The district court overruled Okereke's objection, finding that

he and Okonkwo were on the verge of completing all the acts

necessary for successful completion of a bank fraud, and would have

done so had the banks and the Secret Service not detected their

actions. The district court sentenced Okereke to 10 months

imprisonment and 3 years supervised release.

We review for clear error the district court's factual

findings and de novo its application of the Guidelines. United

States v. Ballew, 40 F.3d 936, 943 (8th Cir. 1994), cert. denied,

115 S. Ct. 1813 (1995). The Sentencing Guidelines provide for a

three-level reduction in conspiracy cases,

unless the defendant or a co-conspirator

completed all the acts the conspirators

believed necessary on their part for the

successful completion of the substantive

offense or the circumstances demonstrate that

the conspirators were about to complete all

such acts but for apprehension or interruption

by some similar event beyond their control.
-3-

U.S.S.G. § 2X1.1(b)(2).

Here, Okereke admitted he had returned to Omaha to complete

the last step in the scheme--negotiating the counterfeit checks.

We agree with the district court that Okereke was not entitled to

the reduction, because the bank fraud "was substantially completed

or was interrupted or prevented on the verge of completion," when

the authorities intervened. See § 2X1.1, comment. (backg'd.). As

the government noted at sentencing, Okereke had "laid literally all

of the groundwork" and had returned to Omaha with the checks,

"ready to commit the crime," and was about to complete all the acts

necessary for the successful completion of the bank fraud but for

the banks having blocked the accounts. Cf. United States v.

Yellowe, 24 F.3d 1110, 1113 (9th Cir. 1994) (defendant who

conspired to possess and use unauthorized access devices not

entitled to § 2X1.1(b)(2) reduction because he had devices and was

about to use them, but for being arrested and the fact that the

necessary equipment was not connected to bank).

Okereke is not entitled to relief under application note 4 to

section 2X1.1. The fact that Okereke may have intended to defraud

the bank of $58,000 but never obtained any money is of no

consequence, because Okereke did not have to obtain any money to

complete the fraud, i.e., to violate 18 U.S.C. § 1344. See United

States v. Solomonson, 908 F.2d 358, 364 (8th Cir. 1990); see also

United States v. Mancuso, 42 F.3d 836, 850 (4th Cir. 1994) (in

cases where there is a completed fraud within an incomplete fraud,

Note 4 directs that the offense level be calculated by taking the

higher level of the actual completed fraud or the intended fraud

minus three levels). Furthermore, Okereke's reliance on United

States v. Watkins, 994 F.2d 1192 (6th Cir. 1993), is misplaced.

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.
-4-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.