The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the conviction of Diape Seck on multiple federal fraud charges in an unpublished per curiam opinion filed Jan. 12, 2026. The three-judge panel unanimously upheld the lower court's ruling from the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland at Greenbelt.
After an eight-day trial, a federal jury convicted Seck of conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349. The conviction also included three counts of bank fraud and aiding and abetting the same, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 1344; four counts of making false entries in bank records, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1005; and receipt of a bribe or reward by a bank employee, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 215(a)(2).
The case originated in 2020 when federal prosecutors in Maryland brought charges against Seck. District Judge Theodore D. Chuang presided over the proceedings, which culminated in the guilty verdict on all nine counts after the extensive trial.
Following his conviction, the district court sentenced Seck to 36 months' imprisonment, followed by a three-year term of supervised release. The court also ordered him to pay $1,708,446.49 in restitution to victims of the fraud scheme.
On appeal, Seck challenged the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction. However, the Fourth Circuit panel, consisting of Circuit Judges Stephanie Thacker, Toby Heytens Benjamin, and Tammy A. Berner, rejected these arguments and affirmed the lower court's judgment in full.
The charges against Seck centered on violations of multiple federal banking statutes designed to protect the integrity of financial institutions. Count 1 involved conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1349, a statute that criminalizes agreements between two or more people to defraud banks or engage in wire fraud schemes.
Counts 2 through 4 charged Seck with bank fraud and aiding and abetting under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 and 1344. These provisions make it a federal crime to knowingly execute or attempt to execute a scheme to defraud a financial institution or obtain money or property under the custody or control of a financial institution through false or fraudulent pretenses.
The prosecution also secured convictions on Counts 5 through 8 for making false entries in bank records under 18 U.S.C. § 1005. This statute prohibits willfully making false entries in any book, report, or statement of any bank, with intent to injure or defraud the bank or deceive any agent appointed to examine the affairs of such bank.
Count 9 involved receipt of a bribe or reward by a bank employee under 18 U.S.C. § 215(a)(2), which criminalizes the acceptance of anything of value by bank employees in connection with any transaction or business of the financial institution.
The case was prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Maryland, with U.S. Attorney Erek L. Barron leading the prosecution team. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Darren S. Gardner and Elizabeth G. Wright handled the case for the government.
Seck was represented on appeal by Richard S. Stolker of the Law Offices of Richard S. Stolker in Rockville, Maryland. The appeal was submitted to the Fourth Circuit on Oct. 30, 2025, and decided approximately two and a half months later.
The Fourth Circuit's decision was issued as an unpublished per curiam opinion, meaning it was unanimous and authored by the panel collectively rather than by an individual judge. Under Fourth Circuit precedent, unpublished opinions are not binding authority, though they may be cited for their persuasive value.
The substantial restitution order of more than $1.7 million reflects the scope of the financial harm caused by the fraud scheme. Federal sentencing guidelines typically require courts to order full restitution to victims of federal fraud crimes, regardless of the defendant's ability to pay.
The three-year term of supervised release following Seck's imprisonment will likely include conditions such as financial monitoring, restrictions on access to financial accounts, and regular reporting to a probation officer. Such conditions are standard in white-collar fraud cases to prevent recidivism.
The case demonstrates federal prosecutors' continued focus on financial crimes involving banks and other financial institutions. The charges span multiple aspects of bank fraud, from conspiracy and direct fraud to making false records and bribery of bank employees.
With the Fourth Circuit's affirmation, Seck's conviction becomes final unless he seeks review by the Supreme Court. However, the high court accepts very few cases for review, particularly unpublished circuit court decisions in routine criminal appeals.
The case adds to the body of Fourth Circuit precedent on bank fraud prosecutions, though its unpublished status limits its precedential value for future cases in the circuit.