Whether the erroneous issuance of a deliberate ignorance or willful blindness instruction is harmless as a matter of law and beyond appellate review where minimally sufficient evidence of the defendant's 'actual knowledge' was presented at trial

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the erroneous issuance of a deliberate ignorance or willful blindness instruction is harmless as a matter of law and beyond appellate review where minimally sufficient evidence of the defendant’s “actual knowledge” was presented at trial. 2. Whether a medical practitioner charged under § 841 can be found guilty for issuing a prescription that is either outside the usual scope of professional practice or does not serve a legitimate medical purpose; or whether the government must prove that a practitioner acted both outside the usual course of professional practice and without a legitimate medical purpose in order to obtain a conviction.