Opinion ID: 866918
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Scope of Offense

Text: Section 2J1.2(b)(3)(C) provides a two-level upward adjustment if the defendant's offense was extensive in scope, planning, or preparation. Bakhtiari argues the only evidence of his planning or preparation is the photographs of B.H.'s son and daughter-in-law Bakhtiari downloaded. Bakhtiari never admitted he doctored the photographs with the cross-hairs, created an anonymous email account, or caused the email to be sent through the Missouri hotel's server. Visiting a website and displaying a rifle are not extensive, he claims. Reviewing factual findings for clear error and legal applications de novo, Hoffman, 707 F.3d at 935, we once again conclude Bakhtiari is mistaken. As noted above, Bakhtiari engaged in extensive planning to obtain the photographs of B.H.'s house and family members, create a false email account, and otherwise plan and disguise his actions. Although we can locate no Eighth Circuit caselaw heretofore applying this enhancement, Bakhtiari's conduct is no narrower in scope than the conduct of other defendants whose sentences have been enhanced in other circuits. See United States v. Rodriguez, 499 F. App'x 904, 909 (11th Cir. 2012) (per curiam) (unpublished) (applying the enhancement to a prison inmate who preserved a semen stain on her clothing and falsely claimed three times she was sexually assaulted by a corrections officer), cert. denied, 81 U.S.L.W. 3580 (Apr. 15, 2013); United States v. Jensen, 248 F. App'x 849, 851 (10th Cir. 2007) (applying the enhancement to a prison official who gave numerous inmates clean urine samples in exchange for sexual favors). We see no error in the district court's application of the enhancement. -6-