United States v. Deaunta Belcher, 92 F.4th 643

Deaunta Belcher was convicted and sentenced to life for involvement in a murder-for-hire scheme, drug conspiracy, use of a firearm causing death, and obstruction (misleading communication), after participating in the killing of Devin Wallace, whom conspirators believed was cooperating with the DEA.
The superseding indictment charged Belcher under 18 U.S.C. § 1958(a) (murder-for-hire) without including the ",death results" enhancement, but the court instructed the jury on—and sentenced him under—the enhanced penalty for death resulting.
Belcher challenged his murder-for-hire conviction on the grounds of constructive amendment and his obstruction conviction on grounds of variance and insufficiency of the evidence.
On appeal, he argued the government constructively amended the indictment, varied from the obstruction charge in the indictment, and that evidence was insufficient for the obstruction conviction.
The Sixth Circuit Court reviewed the claims under the plain error standard because Belcher did not preserve most issues at trial, and ultimately affirmed all convictions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Constructive amendment of indictment	Indictment failed to charge “death results” enhancement but conviction/sentencing included it, violating notice and grand jury rights	Sufficient notice provided; no plain error affecting fairness	Error was plain but did not affect substantial rights due to clear notice; conviction affirmed
Indictment variance (obstruction count)	Government relied on different facts at trial than those in indictment to establish elements	No variance; indictment facts related to one element, extra evidence proved another	No impermissible variance; conviction affirmed
Sufficiency of the evidence (obstruction)	Evidence did not prove intent to hinder federal investigation	Evidence supported likelihood that information would go to feds	Evidence sufficient for conviction under §1512(b)(3)

United States v. Cotton, 535 U.S. 625 (plain error on omitted elements in indictment does not require reversal if no serious effect on judicial fairness)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (facts increasing penalty must be charged and found by jury)
Mathis v. United States, 579 U.S. 500 (different statutory alternatives are distinct offenses for jury charging purposes)
Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1 (failure to submit element to jury subject to harmless error review)
Washington v. Recuenco, 548 U.S. 212 (errors not always structural; harmless error applies)