the same stash that was discovered on the later date. See United States v. Sims, 683 F.3d 815, ent that his 2004 conspiracy conviction subsumes the possession-with-intent-to-distribute offenses from that same year, which he committed to further the conspiracy. But we have long recognized offenses that are “part of a series” or “related to [an] entire course of events” as “distinct in time” under the ACCA so long as they “form[ ] a separate unit within the whole” and are “punctuated occurrence[s] with a limited duration.” United States v. Roach, 958 F.2d 679, 684 (6th Cir. 1992) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). These separate offenses may include crimes committed during and in furtherance of a conspiracy. See United States v. Melbie, 751 F.3d 586, 587 (8th Cir. 2014) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Noel, 488 Fed.Appx. 928,
holding that once a defendant becomes associated with a conspiracy he is responsible for all of the acts of the conspiracy even those which occurred before or after his association with the conspiracy holding in narcotics conspiracy case that phone calls from one district into another can establish venue in the latter district so long as they further the ends of the conspiracy holding that conspiracy and possessionwithintenttodeliver offenses occurred on different occasions under the acca where they overlapped in time and the latter advanced the conspiracy but was a discrete episode within it holding that the notion of enterprise conspiracy has largely rendered the old distinction between single conspiracy and multiple conspiracy irrelevant to rico conspiracy charges holding that evidence of specific uncharged drug trafficking offenses were not extrinsic to prosecution for conspiracy to possess and distribute cocaine where the events occurred within the time period of the alleged conspiracy and were demonstrative of the conspirators conduct