Court Opinion

ID: 2964743
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:30:25.289028+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:43:00.691041
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ____________________

        No. 96-1678 

                              JOSE IVAN MONTANEZ-ANAYA,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                              UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                 Defendant, Appellee.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

                    [Hon. Hector M. Laffitte, U.S. District Judge]
                                              ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                 Selya, Circuit Judge,
                                        _____________
                              Cyr, Senior Circuit Judge,
                                   ____________________
                              and Lynch, Circuit Judge.
                                         _____________

                                 ____________________

            Jose Montanez-Anaya on brief pro se.
            ___________________
            Guillermo  Gil,   United  States   Attorney,  Nelson   Perez-Sosa,
            ______________                                ___________________
        Assistant United States Attorney,  and Jose A. Quiles-Espinosa, Senior
                                               _______________________
        Litigation Counsel, on brief for appellee.

                                 ____________________

                                    June 20, 1997
                                 ____________________

                 Per  Curiam.    Convicted  on drug  charges,  Jose  Ivan
                 ___________

            Montanez-Anaya   appeals  a  district   court  judgment  that

            summarily dismissed  his motion to vacate  his sentence under

            28  U.S.C.    2255.    Appellant maintains  that  his defense

            counsel rendered  ineffective assistance  by failing to  have

            appellant  testify  in  support  of  his  claim  for a  minor

            participant   adjustment  under  U.S.S.G.   3B1.2(b)  and  by

            failing to  seek  a departure  under U.S.S.G.   5H1.4 on  the

            ground  that appellant has  the human  immunodeficiency virus

            (HIV).1
                  1

                 This court  has thoroughly  reviewed the record  and the

            parties' briefs on  appeal.  Although the  district court did

            not expressly  address these claims, we agree  that they were

            properly dismissed.  The  testimony that appellant might have

            offered  at  sentencing  does  not  show  that  there   is  a

            reasonable probability  that he  would have received  a minor

            participant adjustment  had he testified.   Moreover, none of

            the  cases that  appellant has  cited support  his contention

                                
            ____________________

               1In relevant part,  5H1.4 provides that,
               1

                 Physical  condition ... is  not ordinarily relevant
                 in determining whether a sentence should be outside
                 the  applicable  guideline   range.    However,  an
                 extraordinary  physical impairment may  be a reason
                 to impose a sentence below the applicable guideline
                 range;  e.g., in  the  case of  a seriously  infirm
                         ____
                 defendant, home  detention may be  as efficient as,
                 and less costly than, imprisonment.

                                         -2-

            that he was entitled to this adjustment as a  matter of law.2
                                                                        2

            Defense  counsel did not  render constitutionally ineffective

            assistance in failing to have appellant testify in support of

            his request for a minor participant adjustment.  

                 We further discern no error in defense counsel's failure

            to seek a  5H1.4 departure.  Having  AIDS or being HIV+ alone

            will not support  such a departure  absent evidence that  the

            defendant's  condition  has  resulted  in  an  "extraordinary

            physical impairment."  See, e.g., United States v. Rabins, 63
                                   ___  ____  _____________    ______

            F.3d  721, 728 (8th Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 1031
                                            _____ ______

            (1996); United  States  v. Woody,  55  F.3d 1257,  1275  (7th
                    ______________     _____

            Cir.),  cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 234 (1995); United States v.
                    _____ ______                         _____________

            Thomas,  49 F.3d 253, 261  (6th Cir. 1995);  United States v.
            ______                                       _____________

            Streat,  893 F. Supp. 754,  756 (N.D. Ohio  1995).  Appellant
            ______

            alleged  no   facts  to  suggest  that   his  condition  even

            approaches this level of impairment.3  Defense counsel cannot
                                                3

            be faulted for failing to raise an insubstantial claim.  See,
                                                                     ___

            e.g., United States v. Acha, 910 F.2d 28, 32 (1st Cir. 1990).
            ____  _____________    ____

                                
            ____________________

               2To the  contrary, role in the  offense determinations are
               2
            fact-bound.   See United States v. Ruiz-Del Valle, 8 F.3d 98,
                          ___ _____________    ______________
            104 (1st Cir.  1993).   Accord United States  v. Garvey,  905
                                    ______ _____________     ______
            F.2d  1144, 1146 (8th Cir.  1990); United States v. Gallegos,
                                               _____________    ________
            868  F.2d  711,  713  (5th   Cir.  1989);  United  States  v.
                                                       ______________
            Buenrostro, 868 F.2d 135, 137 (5th Cir.  1989), cert. denied,
            __________                                      _____ ______
            495 U.S. 923 (1990).

               3Appellant's  objections to the  Magistrate Judge's report
               3
            indicate that he is  not physically ill, but rather  seeks to
            be released  to  avoid  the  hardships that  may  attend  HIV
            sufferers in prison.   Unfortunately for appellant, this does
            not provide a basis for a  5H1.4 departure.

                                         -3-

            Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.
                                                               ________

                                         -4-