With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". convictions”). The district court sentenced defendant to sixty months of imprisonment on his false-claims convictions and to eleven months of imprisonment on his Social-Security convictions, to be served consecutively for a total of seventy-one months of imprisonment, followed by three years of supervised release. Defendant appeals the district court’s calculation of his sentence under the United States Sentencing Guidelines (“U.S.S.G.”) on several grounds. For the reasons explained below, we AFFIRM defendant’s sentence. I. Background Defendant’s convictions were based upon the following conduct. In 1997, Debra Coburn. Donna Johnson, Eterial Johnson, Falinisa Smith, Eleanor Stepheny, and Joyce Turner, mothers in defen dant’s Memphis, Tennessee, neighborhood, receiv ir.1999) (<HOLDING>). A factual finding is clearly erroneous when,

A: holding that we review for clear error a district courts factual determination as to whether prior cases were consolidated for sentencing under ussg  4a12a2 and that we give the court due deference in its application of the guidelines to that determination
B: holding that we review for clear error a district courts factual determination of the conduct in which defendant engaged but that we review de novo the district courts determination of whether that conduct constitutes relevant conduct for purposes of ussg  1b13a2
C: holding that we review for clear error the bankruptcy courts factual findings
D: holding that we review for clear error a district courts factual determination of a defendants role in an offense for purposes of applying ussg  3b11a
A.