Sorry I posted the wrong link before. This is the actual full sentencing document. It makes it explicit that the sentence is being enhanced by the murder for hire allegations.
> Accordingly, there is no basis for Ulbricht’s objection to the PSR’s inclusion of a Guidelines enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(2), which applies “[i]f the defendant used violence, made a credible threat to use violence, or directed the use of violence.” (Def.’s Ltr. dated May 22, 2015, at 80). As its plain terms make clear, the enhancement does not require that violence actually occur, but only that violence be credibly intended. See United States v. Harris, 578 Fed. Appx. 451, 453-54 (5th Cir. 2014) (affirming application of enhancement even though “there was no actual drug stash” that defendant intended to rob, explaining: “the enhancement's view that higher sentences are warranted for those with a propensity for violence—even if just reflected in a threat and not an actual act of violence—is implicated even when the threat occurs in connection with a sting”). Moreover, contrary to Ulbricht’s argument that the murder-for-hire solicitations constitute uncharged conduct that cannot be factored into his base offense level, the solicitations were specifically charged as an overt act of the alleged narcotics conspiracy. See Indictment S1 14 Cr. 68 (KBF)¶¶ 16.b & 16.c. Moreover, all relevant conduct, whether charged or uncharged, must be considered in calculating Ulbricht’s base offense level in any event. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3(a). Notably, Ulbricht does not challenge any other aspect of the Guidelines calculation in the PSR. The Government agrees with the calculation in its entirety.
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2088711/silk-road...