“participants.” But he complains that the remaining two persons (Andy Speck and Howard Knauer) were, at most, customers of the drug ring and thus not properly counted. In light of the testimony that Speck distributed cocaine to others, it is not clear that Speck was a mere buyer, as defendant suggests. But even if counting Speck could be considered an error, defendant has not shown that his substantial rights were affected or that any error seriously affects the fairness of the proceeding. The evidence at trial implicated others in the drug-distribution scheme, including Pelón and Orozco. Thus, even not counting Speck, there were sufficient “participants” to allow the § 3Bl.l(a) enhancement, and no plain error. See United States v. Uscanga-Mora, 562 F.3d 1289, 1295 (10th Cir.) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 289, 175
holding that because the district courts error resulted in the imposition of a senfence substantially greater than the maximum otherwise permitted under the sentencing guidelines the error affected the defendants substantial rights and the fairness of the judicial proceedings holding that the defendants substantial rights were not affected by a sentencing guidelines enhancement even in the absence of a specific finding by the district court because the evidence amply supported the enhancement holding that where the district courts sentencing decision was amply supported by the evidence and the defendant thus received a sentence merited by the evidence the defendant could not show the error affected his substantial rights recognizing under plain error review that the burden to show that substantial rights have been prejudiced is on the party that failed to raise the issue below and for an error to have affected substantial rights the error must have affected the outcome of the district court proceedings holding that because the district courts error resulted in the imposition of a sentence substantially greater than the maximum otherwise permitted under the sentencing guidelines the error affected the defendants substantial rights and the fairness of the judicial proceedings