Appellant was convicted of conspiracy to launder money and sentenced to a two-year term on the conspiracy count, with a four-year enhancement under Penal Code section 186.10, subdivision (c)(1)(D) for money laundering transactions exceeding $2.5 million. In his original appeal, Athar contended that the 186.10 enhancement had to be stricken because it was not supported by substantial evidence. The claim was rejected, but the Supreme Court granted review and transferred the matter back to the appellate court with directions to reconsider the opinion in light of the question of whether a money laundering enhancement under section 186.10, subdivision (c) can be applied to a defendant not convicted of money laundering, but only of conspiracy to commit money laundering. Here, the appellate court again affirmed the judgment, concluding that the court properly enhanced the sentence. Under section 182, a conspirator is to be punished in the same manner as is provided for the target felony. Athar further contended that the court prejudicially erred when it failed to instruct the jury that the overt act necessary to support the conspiracy must have occurred after July 2, 1996, within the three-year limitation period for that offense. The appellate court here held that Athar forfeited the right to raise claims relating to the statute of limitations by failing to raise the defense in the trial court.