Whether a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 844(h)(2) for carrying an 'explosive, namely, smokeless powder' can be based on the prosecution's argument that the defendant carried other explosive materials such as 'gunpowder' and 'powders used for blasting' in violation of Stirone v. United States

QUESTION PRESENTED Where a grand jury charges a defendant with violating 18 U.S.C. § 844(h)(2) based on the carrying of an “explosive, namely, smokeless powder,” may he be convicted under that statute where the prosecution argued and the trial court agreed that he could be convicted for carrying other explosive materials, such as “gunpowder” and “powders used for blasting,” or does this broadened basis for conviction constitute an impermissible constructive amendment to the indictment in violation of the holding in Stirone v. United States, 361 U.S. 212 (1960)? i