SUMMARY ORDER

Defendants-Appellants Tebiah S. Tucker and Christopher McMillian appeal from a judgment of conviction entered against them by the District Court after a jury found them guilty of: narcotics conspiracy in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 846 (Count One); murder while engaging in a drug trafficking offense in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 848(e)(1)(A) (Count Two); RICO conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d) (Count Three); violent crimes in aid of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1959 (Counts Four and Five); violating 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) by possessing and using a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime—namely, the narcotics conspiracy described in Count One of the indictment (Counts Nine, Ten, Eleven and Twelve); and being felons in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Counts Fourteen and Fifteen). On appeal, defendants seek judgments of acquittal for various of their convictions1 and a remand for reconsideration of their sentences pursuant to United States v. Crosby, 397 F.3d 103 (2d Cir. 2005).2 We as*347sume the parties’ familiarity with the facts, the issues on appeal, and the procedural history of this case.

Defendants and the Government both contend that defendants’ conviction on Count One of the indictment (conspiracy to distribute or possess with intent to distribute fifty or more grams of crack cocaine) is invalid because (1) the jury originally convicted both defendants of conspiracy to distribute or possess with intent to distribute less than fifty grams of crack cocaine,3 and (2) the verdict memorialized in the judgment of conviction was obtained when the District Court incorrectly resubmitted the verdict form on count one to the jury after the jury returned its verdict, was polled, and discharged.

We need not decide whether the District Court erred because all parties request that the original verdict be reinstated. Accordingly, we remand this matter to the District Court in order that the District Court may (1) reinstate the jury’s original verdict on count one and (2) reconsider defendants’ sentences pursuant to United States v. Crosby.

We have considered defendants’ remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. We therefore affirm their other convictions.

The mandate shall issue forthwith.