Court Opinion

ID: 2962662
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:00:25.458609+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:01:40.028233
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

          July 13, 1994         [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 94-1003                                    UNITED STATES,                                      Appellee,                                          v.                                  THOMAS P. ATWOOD,                                Defendant, Appellant.                                 ____________________        No. 94-1095                              LAWRENCE EDWARD WOOLSTON,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                          v.                              UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                                 Defendant, Appellee.                                                                                      ____________________                    APPEALS FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                              FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE                       [Hon. Gene Carter, U.S. District Judge]                                          ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                              Torruella, Selya and Stahl,                                   Circuit Judges.                                   ______________                                 ____________________            Thomas P. Atwood on brief pro se.            ________________            Lawrence Edward Woolston on brief pro se.            ________________________            Jay P. McCloskey, United States Attorney,  and Michael M.  DuBose,            ________________                               __________________        Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellees.                                 ____________________                                 ____________________                 Per  Curiam.    The  judgments  in  the  above-captioned                 ___________            appeals  are affirmed on the basis of our decisions in United                                                                   ______            States v. Dimeo, ___ F.3d ___, No. 93-2272 (1st Cir. July  7,            ______    _____            1994), and United States  v. Boot, ___ F.3d ___,  No. 93-2317                       _____________     ____            (1st Cir. June 7, 1994).                 Affirmed.                 ________