Opinion ID: 659963
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Scope and Function of Sec. 860

Text: 15 While conceding that the lack of proof regarding apparatus at Crawford Park resulted in a failure to satisfy the requirements for a playground, the government urges that this defect should not invalidate the entire conviction. Instead, at oral argument the government argued that Sec. 860(a) should not be viewed as a separate offense, but rather considered solely as a sentence enhancement which may or may not be applied to the underlying offense of distribution of crack cocaine. 16 We agree with those circuits that have concluded that Sec. 860 constitutes an offense which has as an element of proof that the distribution occurred within 1,000 feet of a protected place. While some circuits construed Sec. 860 before it was renumbered and amended, these differences do not affect our inquiry. Similarly, Sec. 860(a) includes as protected places playgrounds and various types of schools. Some circuits construed the statute in the school context, yet the analysis of Sec. 860(a) as an offense would also apply to a playground. See United States v. Freyre-Lazaro, 3 F.3d 1496, 1507 (11th Cir.1993) (holding that Sec. 841(a) is a lesser included offense of Sec. 860); United States v. Scott, 987 F.2d 261, 266 (5th Cir.1993) (same); United States v. Thornton, 901 F.2d 738, 741 (9th Cir.1990) (statute incorporates the sentencing enhancement element into the underlying offense); United States v. Holland, 810 F.2d 1215, 1218 (D.C.Cir.) (statute adds an element to the offense of section 841(a) which must be proved), cert. denied, 481 U.S. 1057, 107 S.Ct. 2199, 95 L.Ed.2d 854 (1987). 17 Here, the indictment lists the combination of statutes in one count. An element of that offense was not proven. As a result, Mr. Smith's conviction must be reversed.