Summary
This Second Circuit opinion affirms the defendant’s convictions for heroin distribution and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime. The court evaluates the sufficiency of the evidence supporting constructive possession and examines whether the trial court constructively amended the indictment by instructing the jury on a different predicate drug offense. Concluding that any potential error was not clear or obvious and that the constructive amendment claim was abandoned on appeal, the court upholds the district court’s judgment.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether sufficient evidence supported Prawl's conviction for possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A).
- Whether the government and district court constructively amended Count 5 by using Prawl's possession-with-intent-to-distribute offense in Count 6 as the predicate drug-trafficking crime instead of the distribution offenses identified in the indictment.
- Whether Prawl abandoned his constructive-amendment claim by failing to raise it in his opening appellate brief.
Holdings
- The evidence was sufficient for a rational jury to find that Prawl constructively possessed the handgun.
- The evidence was sufficient to establish the specific nexus required between Prawl's firearm possession and his possession with intent to distribute heroin charged in Count 6.
- Prawl abandoned his constructive-amendment claim on appeal by failing to raise it in his opening brief and failing to respond to the government's abandonment argument.
- Even if the constructive-amendment claim had not been abandoned, Prawl could not obtain relief because any error was not clear or obvious and therefore was not plain error.
Key quotations
“To prove “furtherance,” the government must show a “specific nexus between the charged firearm and the charged drug selling operation.”” (9)
“Any changes that occurred in relation to Count 5 between Prawl’s indictment and conviction do not amount to an “egregious and obvious” constructive amendment in light of this circuit’s caselaw.” (19)
Factual background
Prawl made four heroin sales to an undercover investigator in September 2019, retrieving heroin from an apartment in Schenectady, New York, during three of the transactions. During an October 4, 2019 police raid, Prawl was detained in a bedroom containing his identification card, a closet with heroin and drug-distribution paraphernalia, and a nearby dresser containing an unloaded semiautomatic handgun next to a loaded magazine. The gun was readily accessible, Prawl lacked a license for it, and the district court instructed the jury that the § 924(c) firearm charge was predicated on the possession-with-intent-to-distribute offense charged in Count 6 rather than the September distribution offenses identified in Count 5 of the indictment.
Procedural history
Prawl was indicted in the Northern District of New York on drug-distribution, possession-with-intent-to-distribute, and firearm-in-furtherance charges. After a jury convicted him on all six counts, the district court entered judgment on March 31, 2023, sentencing him to concurrent 24-month terms on the drug counts and a consecutive 60-month term on the firearm count. The Second Circuit affirmed, also granting consolidation of a related bail appeal and denying bail pending appeal as moot.