men while they were in the back; he did not say he never saw Lewis. Indeed, as set forth above, Clements testified he saw Lewis pull a brown paper bag out of his waistband that contained a plastic bag "full of heroin.” 3 . Although Clements testified that he received a call from Anderson, he is evidently referring to the earlier call; phone records show that Clements made the IHOP call from his number, 453-xxxx, to Anderson's phone, 338-xxxx. 4 . To be deemed a career offender, a defendant, among other things, must have “two prior felony convictions of either a crime of violence or a controlled substance offense.” § 4B 1.1(a). Lewis does not challenge the use of his prior controlled substance conviction. 5 . But see United States v. Aviles-Solarzano, 623 F.3d 470, 473-76 (7th Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>). 6 . Notwithstanding Lewis's express statement
holding that it was not error plain or otherwise for a judge to rely on an unsubstantiated summary of a state indictment contained in the psr to determine that the prior offense was a crime of violence even though the defendant had not admitted that the summary of the indictment was correct holding that the amendment of the indictment was permissible under the statutory predecessor to code  192231 because the amendment did not within the meaning of the statute change the nature of the offense charged in the original indictment holding motion to dismiss an indictment pursuant to rule 12b is not a device for a summary trial of the evidence the sole function of this motion is to test the sufficiency of the indictment to charge an offense holding that constructive amendments alter or expand the essential elements of the offense contained in the indictment such that the possible bases for conviction go beyond what is contained in the indictment holding that an indictment gave sufficient notice when the indictment charged the elements of the offense