Court Opinion

ID: 2964024
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:19:08.829694+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:16:45.567788
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ____________________

        No. 95-1697

                                    UNITED STATES,

                                      Appellee,

                                          v.

                                     DONALD ROY,

                                Defendant, Appellant.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                            FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

                     [Hon. Morton A. Brody, U.S. District Judge]
                                            ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

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

                                 ____________________

            Tina Schneider on brief for appellant.
            ______________
            Jay P. McCloskey, United States  Attorney, Margaret D.  McGaughey,
            ________________                           ______________________
        Assistant  U.S. Attorney, and  Gregory A. Campbell,  Special Assistant
                                       ___________________
        U.S. Attorney, on brief for appellee.

                                 ____________________

                                    March 12, 1996
                                 ____________________

                 Per  Curiam.   Defendant Donald  Roy  contends that  the
                 ___________

            district court erred in failing  to make a downward departure

            under    5K2.13 of  the United  States Sentencing  Guidelines

            (for  diminished capacity) and  under U.S.S.G.    5K2.16 (for

            voluntary disclosure).   Roy's failure to request  a downward

            departure  under  either  section   in  the  district   court

            forecloses  our consideration of the issue. See United States
                                                        ___ _____________

            v. Field, 39  F.3d 15, 21 (1st Cir. 1994),  cert. denied, ___
               _____                                    ____________

            U.S. ___, 115 S. Ct. 1806 (1995).

                 To   the  extent  Roy   is  arguing  that   he  received

            ineffective assistance  of counsel because  his attorney  did

            not  move  for  a  departure  under      5K2.13,  5K2.16, the

            argument  is without  merit,  for there  was  scant, if  any,

            evidentiary support for  a departure.  To the  extent Roy may

            be  premising an  ineffective assistance  claim on  counsel's

            failure adequately to develop the  record, the matter is  not

            presently reviewable.   See  United States  v. Jadusingh,  12
                                    ___  _____________     _________

            F.3d 1162, 1169-70 (1st Cir. 1994).

                 The sentence is summarily affirmed. See Loc. R. 27.1. 
                                 _________ ________  ___

                                         -2-