Whether the district court erred in finding sufficient evidence of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute a controlled substance

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether The District Court, Erred When It Found That There was Sufficient Evidence That the Appellant had Committed the Acts Alleged in Count I, Conspiracy to Possess With Intent to Distribute a Controlled Substance, in That There was not Sufficient Evidence that : the Appellant Could Reasonably Foresee That 280 Grams or more of Crack Cocaine was Attributed to him. 2. The Court Erred When It Did Not Grant A Judgment of Acquittal on Count V, Possessing a Firearm in Furtherance of a Drug Trafficking : Crime, Because There Was Insufficient Evidence That Appellant Possessed Marijuana In Furtherance of a Drug Trafficking Crime. 3. The Court Erred When Appellant’s Motion to Suppress a Firearm, Ammunition and Post Arrest Statements That Were Procured on November 18, 2013, Were Denied. The Court Further Erred When Post Arrest Statements Stemming From The Arrest on November 18, 2013 That Were Procured as Fruit of the Poisonous Tree and Taken From the Appellant on November 27 Were Not Suppressed. ii 4, Whether the Court Made a Sufficient Determination That the Appellant Was Competent to Waive His Right to Appeal & Whether the Trial Court Should Determine if the Appellant was Competent During the Course of His Trial. 5. The Court Failed To Conduct a Competency Hearing When the Evidence of Plaintiff's Mental Infirmities Were Presented.