context: Gibson next argues the. district court erred by applying a five-level enhancement under. SS 4B1.5(b). He contends the two separate occasions the guideline requires to constitute a "pattern of activity" should not include activity involved in his instant offense of conviction for sex trafficking, i.e., the multiple occasions he posted ads on Backpage.com, the multiple occasions the minor engaged in' prohibited sexual conduct at his direction, his production of a sexually explicit video of the minor, or his own sexual contact with the victim. This argument is foreclosed by our precedent.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 648 F.3d 671, 675
citation_a.parenthetical: "[O]ne panel of this Court is not at liberty to overrule an -opinion filed by. another panel"
citation_a.sentence: See United States v. Rojas, 520 F.3d 876, 883 (8th Cir. 2008) (“We now hold that subsection (b) [of § 4B1.5] may apply where there is no prior sex offense conviction and the only ‘pattern of ... .conduct’ is conduct involved in the present offense of conviction”); see also United States v. Wells, 648 F.3d 671, 675 (8th Cir. 2011) (“[O]ne panel of this Court is not at liberty to overrule an -opinion filed by. another panel”).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 520 F.3d 876, 883
citation_b.parenthetical: "We now hold that subsection (b) [of SS 4B1.5] may apply where there is no prior sex offense conviction and the only 'pattern of ... .conduct' is conduct involved in the present offense of conviction"
citation_b.sentence: See United States v. Rojas, 520 F.3d 876, 883 (8th Cir. 2008) (“We now hold that subsection (b) [of § 4B1.5] may apply where there is no prior sex offense conviction and the only ‘pattern of ... .conduct’ is conduct involved in the present offense of conviction”); see also United States v. Wells, 648 F.3d 671, 675 (8th Cir. 2011) (“[O]ne panel of this Court is not at liberty to overrule an -opinion filed by. another panel”).