Defendant's drug and firearm convictions and sentence are affirmed where: 1) the district court's erroneous jury instruction omitting the dangerous or deadly weapon element of 18 U.S.C. section 111 was harmless error that did not affect defendant's substantial rights; 2) the district court clearly separated an officer's testimony into a first "phase" consisting of his percipient observations, and a second "phase" consisting of his credentials in the field of drug trafficking and expert testimony regarding the modus operandi of drug traffickers; and 3) the district court did not abuse its discretion in applying a six-level official victim sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. section 3A1.2 or fail to make the necessary findings of fact when defendant objected to the enhancement in the Presentence Report.
Submitted December 9, 2009
Filed December 30, 2009
Opinion by Judge Tallman
Michael D. Dieni, Assistant Federal Defender, Anchorage, AK
Christine M. Thoreson, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Anchorage, AK