predicate drug conspiracy punishable under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A). The case law is in accord and we need not give this argument any further consideration. See United States v. McCullah, 76 F.3d 1087, 1104-05 (10th Cir.1996); United States v. Snow, 48 F.3d 198, 200 (6th Cir.1995); see also United States v. Villarreal, 963 F.2d 725, 728 (5th Cir.1992) (“We are convinced that Congress created a substantive offense in 21 U.S.C. § 848(e)(1)(B) and that its ‘language, structure, and '... history ... show in the plainest way that Congress intended [it] to be a separate criminal offense which was punishable in addition to, and not as a substitute for, the predicate offenses.’ ” (quoting Garrett, 471 U.S. at 779, 105 S.Ct. 2407)); cf. United States v. NJB, 104 F.3d 630, 632-33 (4th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>). XIX. Sentencing Arguments Raised by Ríos-Ríos
holding that double jeopardy precluded conviction for both conspiracy and engaging in a cce when the conspiracy was used to prove the cce holding that conspiracy is lesserincluded offense of cce holding lopez was inapplicable to the language prior conviction for a felony drug offense in 21 usc  841b1a because felony drug offense was defined in 21 usc  80244 as an offense that is punishable by imprisonment for more than one year under any law of the united states or of a state holding that drug quantity is an element of an offense under 21 usc  841 holding conviction for cce murder 21 usc  848e1 is a separate offense from a cce 21 usc  848c