United States Sixth Circuit

A conviction for drug- and firearm-related offenses is affirmed where: 1) a claim that venue was improper in the Southern District of Ohio was without merit; 2) defendant's bartering of firearms for drugs constituted "use" of a firearm within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. section 924(c)(1); 3) although the district court erred in its instructions to the jury regarding the burden of proof necessary to support a conviction for section 924(c), the error was harmless; 4) no constructive amendment or variance of the indictment occurred; 5) defendant did not demonstrate error regarding a prosecutor's conduct during his trial; 6) a pro se motion for judgment of acquittal or a new trial was properly denied; 7) a claim regarding inaccuracies or alterations of the transcripts of proceedings was meritless; 8) police did not engage in improper interrogation tactics by jointly interviewing two co-conspirators; 9) the district court properly made findings regarding motion to suppress; 10) sentencing facts were properly submitted to the jury; 11) the indictment was sufficient, as was the evidence supporting various counts; 12) a Brady claim was meritless; and 13) there was no plain error as to jury instructions regarding "Conspiracy" and "aiding and abetting".

Appellate Information

• Decided 10/24/2008
• Published 10/24/2008

Judges

• Before:  CLAY and McKEAGUE, Circuit Judges;  BOYKO, District Judge.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Kevin M. Schad, Schad & Schad, Lebanon, Ohio, for Appellant.  Benjamin C. Glassman, Assistant United States Attorney, Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellee.   ON BRIEF:  Kevin M. Schad, Schad & Schad, Lebanon, Ohio, for Appellant.  Benjamin C. Glassman, Assistant United States Attorney, Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellee.   John D. Kuehne, Jr., Terre Haute, Indiana, pro se.