In determining whether the offense in this case was a "major economic offense," the court properly may consider the course of conduct underlying the charge, since defendant did not deny the underlying conduct. State v. Srey, 400 N.W.2d 722, 723 (Minn. 1987). The charge against defendant was based on one of several related criminal acts committed by him in a period of a few days. Credit cards, checks and other items were taken in the afternoon burglary of a residence on May 19, 1983.

A defendant's underlying course of conduct can provide a basis for an upward durational departure in sentencing. See State v. Srey, 400 N.W.2d 722, 722-23 (Minn. 1987) (holding that durational departure was proper when defendant pleaded guilty to one count of forgery but did not deny forging large number of other checks and when defendant agreed to pay restitution for entire amount determined to have been stolen). A district court may order a defendant to pay a restitution amount in excess of the monetary parameters of the offense of which he or she was convicted, but only if the higher amount is supported by a preponderance of the evidence presented at trial.

Lor's admissions at the plea hearing provide a factual basis for the district court's decision to award restitution to the three injured assault victims. See State v. Srey, 400 N.W.2d 722, 723 (Minn. 1987) (affirming restitution order based on course of conduct that appellant did not deny). Thus, the district court did not abuse its discretion by awarding restitution.

Generally, elements of a dismissed charge may not be used to depart unless the record contains a clear indication that the offender admits to the facts of the dismissed charges. State v. Srey, 400 N.W.2d 722, 723 (Minn. 1987); State v. Larkins, 479 N.W.2d 69, 74 (Minn. App. 1991). During the plea hearing, appellant did not admit to the robbery; the factual basis for the plea is limited to the assault.

See State v. Back, 341 N.W.2d 273, 276-77 (Minn. 1983) (court may consider course of conduct underlying offense); State v. Srey, 400 N.W.2d 722, 722-23 (Minn. 1987) (court may rely on course of conduct underlying charge, even conduct that was uncharged or charged but dismissed under plea agreement, unless defendant denied conduct). Because these facts demonstrate a greater-than-normal danger to other people's safety than mere possession of a firearm by a felon, we affirm the trial court's upward durational departure in this case.

See, e.g., Kim v. State, 434 N.W.2d 263, 266 (Minn. 1989); State v. Srey, 400 N.W.2d 722 (Minn. 1987). I would affirm the trial court.

A court may rely on a defendant's course of conduct underlying a charge, even conduct that was uncharged or that was charged but dismissed under a plea agreement, unless the defendant denied the conduct. Statev. Srey, 400 N.W.2d 722, 722-23 (Minn. 1987) (court may rely on course of conduct underlying charge to impose double durational departure where plea hearing transcript demonstrated defendant did not deny forging many other uncharged checks and understood trial court could order restitution in total amount deemed to have been stolen). Because Kimbro did not deny his uncharged conduct and acknowledged that the monetary losses arising from his actions totaled over $31,000, his underlying course of conduct may be considered.

The state produced sufficient evidence under the statute. See State v. Srey, 400 N.W.2d 722, 722-23 (Minn. 1987) (affidavits regarding forged checks totaling $13,158.63 were sufficient to support restitution in that amount even though the complaint mentioned that defendant forged only $150 in checks).