## Facts

- Hinda Osman Dhirane and Muna Osman Jama, naturalized U.S. citizens born in Somalia, participated in online chat rooms used to solicit donations from supporters.
- They collected money in repeated small amounts and transmitted funds to contacts in Somalia and Kenya.
- The government alleged the transfers were intended to assist al-Shabaab, a designated foreign terrorist organization, by supporting its operations and terrorist activity in the Horn of Africa.
- The case was tried to the court (bench trial) in the Eastern District of Virginia.
- The prosecution introduced evidence derived from surveillance authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
- The district court convicted both defendants of conspiring to provide, and providing, material support to al-Shabaab in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2339B.
- The court applied a two-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2M5.3(b)(1)(E) and imposed prison terms of 144 months (Jama) and 132 months (Dhirane).

## Issues

1. Whether denial of suppression of FISA-derived evidence violated the Constitution because FISA permits ex parte, in camera judicial review and limits defense access to classified materials.
2. Whether the district court used an incorrect legal standard by requiring proof that overseas fund recipients were “part of” al-Shabaab for § 2339B liability.
3. Whether the district court properly applied U.S.S.G. § 2M5.3(b)(1)(E) based on intent, knowledge, or reason to believe the support would assist a violent act.

## Decision

- The Fourth Circuit affirmed the convictions and sentences.
- It held that FISA’s ex parte and in camera review procedures, as applied, did not require suppression and were constitutionally permissible.
- It held the district court’s “part of” test reflected a misunderstanding of what § 2339B required in this case, but the error did not warrant reversal because § 2339B liability turned on knowingly providing material support “to” the designated organization.
- It held the § 2M5.3(b)(1)(E) enhancement was supported by evidence that defendants intended, knew, or had reason to believe the funds would assist al-Shabaab’s violent activity.

## Legal Principles

- FISA permits ex parte, in camera judicial review of classified surveillance materials when the government makes the required national-security showing; due process is not violated where the court finds disclosure to the defense is not necessary to assess legality.
- Under 18 U.S.C. § 2339B, the central inquiry is whether a defendant knowingly provided material support “to” a designated foreign terrorist organization; the government need not prove intermediaries or recipients satisfy an added “membership/part of” test when the support is directed to further the organization’s activities.
- U.S.S.G. § 2M5.3(b)(1)(E) applies when material support is provided with intent, knowledge, or reason to believe it will be used to commit or assist a violent act; evidence tying fundraising and transfers to an organization’s military or violent operations can satisfy this standard.

## Conclusion

The Fourth Circuit upheld the use of FISA-derived evidence, clarified that § 2339B does not require a specialized finding that intermediaries are formally “part of” the foreign terrorist organization when the support is knowingly provided to further the organization, and affirmed application of the violent-act enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2M5.3(b)(1)(E).


United States v. Dhirane, 896 F.3d 295 (4th Cir. 2018)