The Hono rable Cynthia H. Hall, United States Circuit Judge for the Ninth 1 Circuit, sitting by designation.



## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 98-2249

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. Conrad A. Jasper, * * [PUBLISH] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: December 14, 1998 Filed: February 17, 1999

___________ Before MCMILLIAN, LAY and HALL, Circuit Judges. 1

___________ PER CURIAM. Conrad A. Jasper pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to distribu te and possess with the intent to distribute cocaine base in violati on of 21 U.S.C. § 846 and 18 U.S.C.The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District 2 of Nebraska, presiding. -2- § 2. The district court held a hearing on Jasper’s objection to the assessment in the 2 Presentence Report of a three-level enhancement of his offense level for being a manager or supervisor of a criminal conspiracy, pursuant to United States Sentencing Guidelines (U.S.S.G.) § 3B1.1(b). Thecourt found the enhancement was appropriate. The c ourt sentenced Jasper to 70 months imprisonment followed by five years o f sup ervisedrelease. Jasper appeals the three-level enhancement for being a manage r or supervisor. We affirm. I. U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1 provides for a three-point increas e in a base offense level “[i]f the de fendant was a manager or supervisor (but not an organizer or leader) and th e criminal act ivity involved five or more participants or was otherwise extensive . . .
. ” U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(b). The district court considers the following factors whe n determining whether an upward adjustment is appropriate: “the nature of th e defendant’s role in the offense, the recruitment of accomplices, and the degree o f partici pationin planning or organizing the offense.” United States v. Loveless , 13 9 F.3d 587, 594 (8th Cir . 1998) (quoting United States v. Flores , 73 F.3d 826, 835 (8th Cir
. 1996)). We will reverse the sentencing court’s factual determination of a defend ant’s role in the offense only if it is clearly erroneous. United States v. Tran , 122 F.3d 670, 674 (8th Cir. 1997). Jasper contends the district court erred because the evidence at his hearing showed on ly that he distributed drugs and not that he managed or supervised others involved in the conspiracy. We disagree. The e vidence at the sentencing hearing demonstrated that Jasper exercise d si gnificant

control over Antonio Rodrigo. Jasper recruited Antonio Rodrigo to sel l crac k cocaine, make deliveries and collect money in exchange for financial support-3-

fromJasper . Jasper determined the price of the crack cocaine sold by Rodrigo an d instructedhim to accept only cash payment for the drugs. Jasper instructed Rodrigo where to sell the drugs , to whom he should sell them and on how to deal with his best customers. Furth ermore, the evidence showed that Jasper controlled others by giving them drugs for bringing him customers, by “fronting” them drugs, and by teachin g another dr ug dealer the technique of cooking cocaine into crack. This court ha s previ ously found a managerial or supervisory role enhancement appropriate where a defendant recruited others to sell drugs, decided the price and method of payment, and determine dwhere the drug sales would occur. Loveless , 139 F.3d at 594; Unite d States v. Ayers , 138 F.3d 360, 364 (8th Cir. ), cert. denied , 119 S. Ct. 219 (1998). We have also con sidered evidence that a defendant fronted drugs to others, United States v. Bond , 135 F.3d 1247, 1249 (8th Cir.), cert. denied , 118 S. Ct. 2388 (1998), an d instruct ed others involved in the offense of criminal techniques, United States v
. Drapeau , 121 F.3d 344, 350 (8th Cir.1997), to support enhancements under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1. T herefore, considering the record as a whole, we find the district court’ s determination that Jasper was a manager or supervisor under U.S. S.G. § 3B1.1 was not clearly erroneous. Jasper’s sentence is affirmed. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.