With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". district court sentenced Ross to 121 months. B We find no fault with the district court’s consideration of the defendant’s role in the underlying wire fraud offense to adjust the money laundering counts. In our first opinion, we observed the related nature of the wire fraud and money laundering conduct: Ross’ wire fraud convictions were predicated on facsimile transmissions of various documents to potential borrowers (e.g., FCAs, letters promising to fund loans, and a letter terminating a loan agreement). The money laundering convictions arose from related, but separate and distinct transactions, namely the deposit of wire fraud proceeds and subsequent acts promoting the carrying on of illegal activity. Ross, 210 F.3d at 920. We concluded by stating [w]e believe that th (8th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). But these cases do not completely forbid such

A: holding that defendants state conviction for carrying a concealed weapon was not part of the instant federal money laundering offense even though the concealed weapon was found at the time of defendants arrest for attempting to carry out money laundering scheme
B: holding that venue did not he in virginia for money laundering that occurred in florida de spite the fact that the money was embezzled in virginia
C: recognizing money laundering as a predicate act under rico
D: holding that fraud and money laundering counts are not so closely related as to permit loss and value grouping under  3d12d
D.