United States v. Qureshi

In United States v. Qureshi, —- F.4th —-, No. 22-20328 (5th Cir. Nov. 20, 2024), the Fifth Circuit vacated several of the defendant’s convictions for distribution of controlled substances, and it remanded his case for further proceedings.

In short, the Fifth Circuit vacated Qureshi’s convictions because the district court had not instructed the jury that “once a defendant meets the burden of producing evidence that” he was “authorized” to distribute a controlled substance, “the Government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knowingly or intentionally acted in an unauthorized manner.” Ruan v. United States, 142 S. Ct. 2370, 2376 (2022). Although Ruan was decided after Qureshi’s trial, it still applied and required reversal of his convictions.

Under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), “[e]xcept as authorized . . ., it shall be unlawful for any person knowingly or intentionally . . . [to] distribute[] or dispense . . . a controlled substance . . . .” At trial, however, the jury was not instructed that to be found guilty, Qureshi must have known he “was acting in an unauthorized manner,” which is required under Ruan. That failure to instruct the jury properly was sufficient to require vacating Qureshi’s convictions for the substantive crimes of distribution of controlled substances.

On the other hand, that was not enough to require vacating Qureshi’s conviction under 21 U.S.C. § 846 for conspiring to distribute controlled substances. The court explained: “To see why the conspiracy instruction was not erroneous of its own accord, it is helpful to parse it carefully.” On the conspiracy count, the jury had been instructed that the Government needed to prove Qureshi “agreed to distribute a controlled substance without authorization” and that he “knew of the unlawful purpose” of the conspiracy. Putting those together, the Fifth Circuit held that “the jury [necessarily] concluded that Qureshi ‘knew of the unlawful purpose of the agreement’ — that he knew the agreement was to distribute controlled substances without authorization.” That conclusion satisfie the Ruan requirement, so the conspiracy conviction was affirmed.