Opinion ID: 201890
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Increased Offense Level

Text: 10 Tavares next claims the trial court wrongly concluded that he had reason to believe the assault rifle he sold to the undercover ATF agent would be used or possessed in connection with another felony. We review a district court's factual determinations under the Sentencing Guidelines for clear error. United States v. Nunez, 146 F.3d 36, 40 (1st Cir.1998). 11 In making its determination, the district court relied on factors including the nature of the weapon, the clandestine nature of the sale, and the fact that the sale price of $1800 was more than six times the market value of the weapon. The court also considered the statements Baptiste made to Tavares in January 1 that he wanted to acquire a gun in order to deal with various people with whom he got beef and that he was ready to shoot those people. Taken together, these factors provide ample support for the district court's conclusion. There was no clear error.