Opinion ID: 770562
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Leading five or more people in a criminal enterprise.

Text: 44 Pursuant to sec. 3B1.1 of the Guidelines, the district court enhanced Baker's offense level by four for leading or organizing criminal activity involving five or more people. As noted, Baker argues that to the extent there was a conspiracy to launder money, it only involved him and his son; therefore, he contends that he should not have his sentence increased under sec. 3B1.1. But the determination of a defendant's role in the offense is to be made on the basis of all conduct within the scope of sec. 1B1.3 (Relevant Conduct), i.e., all conduct included under sec. 1B1.3(a)(1)-(4), and not solely on the basis of elements and acts cited in the count of conviction. U.S.S.G., Chapter 3, Part B, Introductory Comment; see also Montague, 29 F.3d at 324 (The effect of this commentary change is to foreclose . . . any interpretation of the word 'offense' that restricts it to the count of conviction.). As with determining the specific offense characteristics for Baker's conspiracy conviction, then, the district court was required to consider the Relevant Conduct provision in determining Baker's role in the offense. This meant it had to consider all reasonably foreseeable acts and omissions of others in furtherance of the jointly undertaken criminal activity, that occurred during the commission of the offense of conviction, in preparation for that offense, or in the course of attempting to avoid detection or responsibility for that offense. U.S.S.G. sec. 1B1.3(a)(1)(B) (emphasis added). 45 The evidence clearly shows that Baker led and organized at least seven employees. These people processed credit card transactions, kept the books, issued checks, accounted for shift receipts, delivered the receipts to Baker and his son, hired and fired masseuses, made schedules, held meetings, and set policies; all knew that Baker was laundering the proceeds of the prostitution business which ultimately furthered that business, including its receipt and usage of credit card and ATM transactions. The activities of these people were thus integral to the conspiracy. The district court did not clearly err in considering them in evaluating Baker's role in the offense. See House, 110 F.3d at 1284 (although wires in a money laundering conspiracy were sent and received by several people, the defendant ultimately received the proceeds and was the common connection between the co- conspirators; therefore, he properly received a four-level enhancement as an organizer or leader). 46