Assenati Viera and Sebastiao de Souza appeal from sentences imposed following guilty pleas to six counts related to a conspiracy to produce and sell false Social Security and “green” cards. 1 They admitted to completing the cards with photographs, seals, numbers, names and signatures, and to selling them. Their sole argument on appeal is that the district court erred in increasing their base offense level by six levels under U.S.S.G. § 2L2.1(b)(2)(C) (1995). 2 That increase was based on a finding that the offenses to which they pled guilty “involved” one hundred or more documents, within the meaning of the guidelines. Defendants maintain that the evidence did not support a finding that one hundred or more counterfeit documents were actually produced during the conspiracy. But “involved” does not mean “produced.” Nor are the standards of what needs to be proved for conviction the same as those which may be considered for sentencing. We affirm.
Section 2L2.1 of the Guidelines is titled in relevant part: “Trafficking in a Document Relating to Naturalization, Citizenship, or Legal Resident Status.” It provides in relevant part:
(2) If the offense involved six or more documents or passports, increase as follows:
[[Image here]]
U.S.S.G. § 2L2.1(b)(2) (1995). 3 Defendants argue that federal agents obtained only six or seven completed counterfeit documents during their investigation, and that only a two level increase should have been imposed. We reject the notion that the term “involved” refers only to completed documents. Rather, applying a more ordinary definition, we read *9 “involved” as referring to items “draw[n] in,” “implicated” or “entangled.” Webster’s Third New International Dictionary 1993 at 1191.
Here, there was evidence that defendants had produced and trafficked, or intended to produce and traffic, hundreds of counterfeit documents. Analysis of typewriter ribbons seized from defendants’ apartment showed the imprint of over 400 names and Social Security numbers. In addition, over 600 blank Social Security cards were seized from a third co-conspirator’s apartment. The district court properly considered this evidence in its determination of how many documents were “involved” in defendants’ counterfeiting scheme.
See United States v. Salazar,
At sentencing, the government need only prove facts by a preponderance of the evidence.
See United States v. Jackson,
Each defendant’s sentence is affirmed.
Notes
. Defendants pled guilty to violating 18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 1028(a)(5), 1546(a) and 42 U.S.C. § 408(a)(7)(C).
. Sentencing generally proceeds according to the version of the Guidelines effective on that date.
See United States v. Florence,
.This provision of the Sentencing Guidelines, as applied to the defendants, imposes a base offense level ("BOL”) of nine. Viera and De Souza each received a two level reduction for acceptance of responsibility. De Souza received an additional two level reduction for being a minor participant in the conspiracy. The district court then increased each defendant's BOL by six, resulting in a BOL of eleven for De Souza and thirteen for Viera.
Based on these BOLs, the district court sentenced De Souza to four months of incarceration and six months of home detention, followed by two years of probation. The court sentenced Viera to twelve months and a day of incarceration, followed by two years of probation.
.
Contrary to defendants’ assertion,
United States v. Gomes,
