United States v. Terrence Brown, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 15571

Defendant convicted of attempted possession with intent to distribute cocaine (21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846) and of possessing a firearm in furtherance of that drug crime (18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)); appeal challenges only the § 924(c) conviction.
The attempted drug purchase occurred in the defendant’s SUV; the defendant sat in the driver’s seat and passed a bag of cash to an accomplice who handed it to an undercover officer; police arrested them before departure.
A loaded, operable handgun was discovered in a locked secret compartment under the third row of seats; the compartment held only the gun and required a multi-step procedure (~30 seconds) to open and could not be opened unless the second row was folded forward.
The compartment’s design suggested intentional concealment of drugs, cash, and weapons to avoid police discovery; the undisputed inference was that storage was to facilitate drug dealing, not mere self-defense.
The government relied on jury factfinding that the gun’s presence in that compartment facilitated the attempted drug purchase (e.g., security for storing drugs, deterrence of theft, ability to pursue or threaten a fleeing seller).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether possession of the gun was "in furtherance of" the attempted drug trafficking	Gun’s presence in the secret compartment increased security of drugs/money and deterred theft, thus facilitated the attempt	Gun inaccessible during the transaction (compartment closed; required complex steps; defendant sat far), so it could not have furthered the transaction	Affirmed: a reasonable jury could find the gun facilitated the attempt (holistic analysis of facilitation)
Whether the defendant "possessed" the gun for § 924(c) purposes	Government: defendant had control/custody of the compartment and its contents, demonstrating possession	Defendant: physical distance and inaccessibility undermine possession	Possession was conceded by parties and supported by facts; constructive/custodial possession doctrine applies; conviction stands

United States v. Castillo, 406 F.3d 806 (7th Cir. 2005) (discusses § 924(c) in drug contexts)
United States v. Sobrilski, 127 F.3d 669 (8th Cir. 1997) (attempt liability when completion impossible)
United States v. Stallworth, 656 F.3d 721 (7th Cir. 2011) (related attempt/offense analysis)
United States v. Ceballos-Torres, 218 F.3d 409 (5th Cir. 2000) (enumerated factors for § 924(c) "in furtherance" analysis)
United States v. Duran, 407 F.3d 828 (7th Cir. 2005) (application of Ceballos-Torres factors)
United States v. Rawlings, 341 F.3d 657 (7th Cir. 2003) (discussion of possession beyond physical holding)
National Safe Deposit Co. v. Stead, 232 U.S. 58 (1914) (observations on ambiguity of "possession")
United States v. Morris, 977 F.2d 617 (D.C. Cir. 1992) (constructive possession discussion)