Court Opinion

ID: 2964259
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:22:55.875743+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:21:07.520622
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

          September 6, 1996     [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                                 ____________________

          No. 95-1842

                                    UNITED STATES,

                                      Appellee,

                                          v.

                                  RICHARD M. HERSCH,

                                Defendant, Appellant.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

                       [Hon. Rya W. Zobel, U.S. District Judge]
                                           ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________
                            Cyr and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
                                           ______________

                                 ____________________

               Malcolm J. Barach on brief for appellant.
               _________________
               Donald  K.  Stern,  United  States  Attorney,  and  Mark  W.
               _________________                                   ________
          Pearlstein, Assistant United States Attorney.
          __________

                                 ____________________

                                 ____________________

                 Per  Curiam.   Upon  careful  review of  the  briefs and
                 ___________

            record,  we conclude that the sentence imposed was proper for

            the reasons  stated by the district  court.  We add  only the

            following comments.

                 1.   Contrary to defendant's  arguments, the  transcript

            of  the  sentencing hearing  shows  that  the district  court

            adequately considered  all the  circumstances.   Further, the

            district  court  acted within  its discretion  in determining

            that no  downward departure was warranted and that a sentence

            at  the high end of the applicable range was appropriate.  We

            will not review  those determinations.  See United  States v.
                                                    ___ ______________

            Grandmaison, 77 F.3d 555,  560 (1st Cir. 1996) (discretionary
            ___________

            decision not  to depart); United States  v. Vega-Encarnacion,
                                      _____________     ________________

            914 F.2d  20, 25 (1st  Cir. 1990) (discretionary  decision to

            sentence within range), cert. denied, 499 U.S. 977 (1991).  
                                    ____________

                 2.   The  record provides  no  support  for  defendant's

            assertion that the prosecutor acted in bad faith in declining

            to file a motion under U.S.S.G.    5K1.1.  See Wade v. United
                                                       ___ ____    ______

            States, 504 U.S. 181, 187 (1992); United States v. Catalucci,
            ______                            _____________    _________

            36 F.3d 151, 153 (1st Cir. 1994).

                 Affirmed.  See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.
                 ________   ___

                                         -2-