of a consecutive five-year sentence where a defendant possesses a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence; however, “if the firearm is brandished, [the defendant shall] be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not less than 7 years.” 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(l)(A)(ii). “A defendant may be convicted of a § 924(c) charge on the basis of a coconspirator’s use of a gun if the use was in furtherance of the conspiracy and was reasonably foreseeable to the defendant.” United States v. Wilson, 135 F.3d 291, 305 (4th Cir.1998). Moreover, a defendant may be convicted of a § 924(c) offense on the basis of eoconspirator liability even without a separate conspiracy charge. United States v. Zackery, 494 F.3d 644, 647-48 (8th Cir.2007); cf. United States v. Ashley, 606 F.3d 135, 143 (4th Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>). Applying these standards, we hold that the
holding that vicarious coconspirator liability need not be charged in the indictment holding that prior convictions relevant only to the sentencing of an offender found guilty of the charged crime do not need to be charged in an indictment or proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt holding that an indictment gave sufficient notice when the indictment charged the elements of the offense holding that elements of statute which became  924e need not be reflected in indictment for crime charged holding that apparent authority as a separate theory of vicarious liability should not be considered in ftca claims