Court Opinion

ID: 2965054
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:34:37.552058+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:09.349150
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                                 ____________________

        No. 97-1505

                                    UNITED STATES,

                                      Appellee,

                                          v.

                                    JOHN A. FUSCO,

                                Defendant, Appellant.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

                       [Hon. Mary M. Lisi, U.S. District Judge]
                                           ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

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

                                 ____________________

            Randy Olsen on brief for appellant.
            ___________
            Sheldon  Whitehouse, United  States Attorney,  Margaret  E. Curran
            ___________________                            ___________________
        and Charles A. Tamuleviz, Assistant United States Attorneys, on  brief
            ____________________
        for appellee.

                                 ____________________

                                   December 1, 1997
                                 ____________________

                 Per  Curiam.  Upon careful review, we reject appellant's
                 ___________

            contention  that,  in   sentencing  him   on  revocation   of

            probation,   the  district  court  was  bound by  a  downward

            departure  granted  during appellant's  original  sentencing.

            The plain  language of the  applicable statute,  18 U.S.C.   

            3565(a)(2), does  not support  that contention.   See  United
                                                              ___  ______

            States v. Plunkett, 94 F.3d  517, 519 (9th Cir. 1996); United
            ______    ________                                     ______

            States  v. Redmond,  69  F.3d 979,  981-82  (9th Cir.  1995).
            ______     _______

            Appellant's reliance on United States v. Granderson, 511 U.S.
                                    _____________    __________

            39, 57 n.15 (1994), is misplaced.  See United States v. Byrd,
                                               ___ _____________    ____

            116 F.3d 770, 774 (5th Cir. 1997).

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

                                         -2-