Is there any case law where a defendant is convicted of possession with intent to distribute?

Sessions next claims the district court erred in sentencing him on count one of the indictment by ignoring an inconsistency in the jury's verdict. The verdict form indicates that the jury found defendant guilty of both possession with intent to distribute and simple possession. See ER 36. The district court had instructed the jury to consider the lesser-included offense of simple possession only if it acquitted defendant on the charge of possession with intent to distribute. We can't set aside the verdict merely because it was inconsistent with the trial court's instructions, since sufficient evidence introduced at trial supports both convictions. United States v. Smith, 802 F.2d 1119, 1127 (9th Cir.1986).

Sessions challenges the district court's refusal to grant a downward departure at sentencing based on his claim of selective prosecution. We review de novo a district court's ruling that it lacks authority to grant a downward departure; we review for clear error its factual finding that a mitigating circumstance is absent. United States v. Morales, 972 F.2d 1007, 1010 (9th Cir.1992).