Search & seizure; Automobile search; “Probable cause” to search a vehicle as “forfeitable contraband”; Other acts evidence; FRE 404(b); “Prejudicial variance” between the trial proofs & the indictment’s allegations as to conspiracy; Jury instructions; Sentencing; Procedural reasonableness; Base-offense level; USSG § 2D1.1(c)(4); Findings on the drug quantity; Obstruction of justice enhancement (§ 3C1.1); Minor participant reduction (§ 3B1.2); Enhancement for possessing a firearm (§ 2D1.1(b)(1)); Drug-premises enhancement (§ 2D1.1(b)(12))

The court held that the search of defendant-Simpson’s vehicle was supported by probable cause where the vehicle itself was forfeitable contraband. The court also rejected defendants’ evidentiary, jury instruction, and sentencing challenges. Thus, it affirmed their convictions and sentences related to their participation in a Ohio drug distribution scheme. Simpson argued that police lacked probable cause to stop and search his car. But the court disagreed, noting police knew that the former owner, “a known drug dealer, had traded his blue Charger for 330 grams of fentanyl and cash. This evidence alone made it fairly probable that the car had been used to facilitate the distribution of a controlled substance, rendering the vehicle forfeitable contraband under federal and state law.” It was found in a public place, and an inventory search was conducted. “In the end, all of this was by the books.” Defendant-Figures challenged the admission of evidence that he had drugs and cash on his person at a prior traffic stop, claiming it was improper under FRE 404(b). The court again disagreed, holding that the evidence he challenged “was not evidence of another crime; it was evidence of his charged conspiracy.” Thus, it was “intrinsic to the crimes charged.” The court also rejected his argument that he was not involved in the conspiracy but was only the “end purchaser” of the drugs, concluding there was ample evidence for a jury to find the narrow buyer-seller “exception was not at play.” Defendant-Wynn argued that “a legally fatal variance existed between the proof at trial and the conspiracy allegations in the indictment, which charged a single drug conspiracy among 15 codefendants.” He asserted that evidence of more than one conspiracy was presented to the jury. But the court concluded “there was no risk of jury confusion as to Wynn’s responsibility in the conspiracy.” And his “ultimate sentence, which turned on the cocaine he bought or sold” to the conspiracy’s “self-proclaimed ‘middleman king,’” was unaffected by any alleged variance. The court also rejected all three defendants’ sentencing challenges, including to the district court's drug quantity calculations, the obstruction of justice enhancement applied to Simpson, the possessing a firearm enhancement applied to Wynn, and the district court’s refusal to apply a minor participant reduction to Figures.