USCA11 Case: 23-11129 Document: 58-1 Date Filed: 11/26/2024 Page: 1 of 3

[DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 23-11129 ____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus MD RASSAN M. TARABEIN,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama D.C. Docket No. 1:22-cr-00074-JB-B-1 ____________________

Before WILSON, BRASHER, and HULL, Circuit Judges. USCA11 Case: 23-11129 Document: 58-1 Date Filed: 11/26/2024 Page: 2 of 3

2 Opinion of the Court 23-11129

PER CURIAM: Defendant-Appellant Rassan Tarabein appeals his convic- tions for bank fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344(1), false state- ments to an agency of the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2), criminal default in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 3615, 3664(m)(1)(A)(i), and aggravated identity theft in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(1) (with bank fraud pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1344(1) as the predicate offense). He also appeals his sentence of 48 months’ imprisonment. On appeal, Tarabein argues the following: I. The district court erred by not severing Counts One (Bank Fraud) and Five (Aggravated Identity Theft) of his indictment from the rest of the counts. II. His conviction on Count Five (Aggravated Identity Theft) should be vacated because the government’s indictment failed to adequately allege aggravated identity theft and the predicate offense of bank fraud and the government failed to present sufficient evi- dence of the bank fraud. III. The district court inappropriately admitted into evi- dence a check seized from his luggage at the Pen- sacola airport and a Wells Fargo bank statement. IV. Insufficient evidence supports his convictions on Counts One (Bank Fraud), Two (False Statement), and Three (False Statement). USCA11 Case: 23-11129 Document: 58-1 Date Filed: 11/26/2024 Page: 3 of 3

23-11129 Opinion of the Court 3

V. The district court erred in applying the 2-point en- hancement for sophisticated means, applying the 2- point enhancement for obstruction of justice, and denying Tarabein’s request for a variance downward as to his criminal history score due to his criminal his- tory being overstated in the presentence investigation report. After review of the record and the briefs, and with the ben- efit of oral argument, we find no reversible error and, therefore, affirm Tarabein’s convictions and sentence. AFFIRMED.