Court Opinion

ID: 2965418
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:39:57.588072+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:21:11.820824
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

      [NOT FOR PUBLICATION--NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]
                 United States Court of Appeals
                     For the First Circuit

No. 98-1054

                         UNITED STATES,
                                
                           Appellee,
                                
                               v.
                                
                          ELWIN BAKER,
                                
                     Defendant, Appellant.
                                

          APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                                
                   FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE
                                
          [Hon. D. Brock Hornby, U.S. District Judge]
                                

                             Before
                                
                      Selya, Circuit Judge,
                Campbell, Senior Circuit Judge,
                   and Lynch, Circuit Judge.
                                
                                

     Joseph S. Berman and Berman & Dowell on brief for appellant.
     Jay P. McCloskey, United States Attorney, Jonathan A. Toof and
F. Mark Terison, Assistant United States Attorneys, on brief for
appellee.

July 1, 1998

                                
                                

            Per Curiam.  Upon careful review of the briefs and
    record, we perceive no merit in defendant's appellate
    arguments.  Particularly, the district court considered the
    appropriate factors in revoking defendant's supervised release
    and in imposing a term of imprisonment.  We will not second-
    guess the district court's assessment of witness credibility
    and resolution of the conflicting evidence as to the time of
    the sexual assault.  The upward departure was amply supported
    by the record and reasonable in degree.  We decline to address
    the constitutional arguments that defendant raises for the
    first time on appeal.
              Affirmed.  See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.