United States of America v. Ayodele Harrison Arasokun

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 25-6865
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
AYODELE HARRISON ARASOKUN,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 25-6968
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
AYODELE HARRISON ARASOKUN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia,
at Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh, District Judge. (3:17-cr-00086-GMG-RWT-1)
Submitted: May 28, 2026 Decided: June 2, 2026

-- 1 of 3 --

2
Before WYNN, QUATTLEBAUM, and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ayodele Harrison Arasokun, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 3 --

3
PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, Ayodele Harrison Arasokun appeals the district
court’s orders denying his two Fed. R. Crim. P. 33 motions for a new trial. To succeed on
a Rule 33 motion, a defendant must establish all of the following: “that (1) the evidence
is newly discovered; (2) the defendant exercised due diligence; (3) the newly discovered
evidence is not merely cumulative or impeaching; (4) the evidence is material; and (5) the
evidence would probably result in acquittal at a new trial.” United States v. Ali, 991 F.3d
561, 571 (4th Cir. 2021) (citation modified).
Upon review of the record, we discern no abuse of discretion in the district court’s
denials of Arasokun’s motions. See id. at 570 (stating standard of review). Accordingly,
we deny Arasokun’s motion for judicial notice, and we affirm the district court’s orders.
United States v. Arasokun, No. 3:17-cr-00086-GMG-RWT-1 (N.D. W. Va. Oct. 1, 2025;
Oct. 28, 2025). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED

-- 3 of 3 --