The Third Circuit has determined that a Pennsylvania conviction for using a communication facility to commit a felony is overbroad and indivisible as compared to the definitions of a controlled substance offense and an aggravated felony. Specifically, the court determined that the facilitated felony is a mean, and not an element, of the offense. One juror can believe that Felony A was committed by use of the communication device, while another juror believes Felony B was committed.
The full text of Hillocks v. Attorney General can be found here:
https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/172384p.pdf