The Third Circuit found that the evidence was insufficient to sustain a conviction for distributing fentanyl within 1,000 feet of a playground. The defendant was prosecuted after a woman was found dead from an overdose of fentanyl. A jury subsequently convicted him of distributing and conspiring to distribute the fentanyl that killed her. He was also convicted of distributing fentanyl to someone who was pregnant and distributing it within 1,000 feet of a playground. The District Court sentenced the defendant to life imprisonment. He appealed and argued that the evidence was insufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, that he was prejudiced by the government’s failure to timely disclose potentially exculpatory evidence, and that the District Court erred by imposing two terms of life imprisonment. The Third Circuit vacated the conviction for distributing fentanyl within 1,000 feet of a playground but otherwise affirmed. The Court joined several other circuit courts of appeals in holding that the definition of a playground must be proven as an element of 21 U.S.C. § 860(a). Here, the defendant’s due process rights were violated because “the jury was asked to weigh the evidence of the defendant’s intent to distribute a controlled substance within 1,000 feet of a playground without knowing the government had to prove that the area constituted a playground under § 860(a).”
