Opinion ID: 555493
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: One Level Increase for Value of Funds

Text: 19 Rodriguez next contends that the district court erred by including transactions other than those for which he was convicted in determining that the value of the funds that Rodriguez had controlled was over $100,000. He cites Barbontin for the proposition that only funds anchored to the transaction leading to the conviction are relevant for purposes of sentence enhancement. 20 Again, using the same analysis as in Part II.A. above, we find Rodriguez's argument to be misguided. Because the funds involved in these transactions were part of the same course of conduct or common scheme or plan as the offense of conviction, they may be considered as relevant conduct in an adjustment under Chapter Three of the Guidelines. Thus, we affirm the district court's one level increase for the value of funds involved.