Court Opinion

ID: 2964068
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:19:58.567803+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:42:49.737586
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

          April 23, 1996
                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                                 ____________________

        No. 95-1285

                                    UNITED STATES,

                                      Appellee,

                                          v.

                                HECTOR RIVERA SANTANA,

                                Defendant, Appellant.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

             [Hon. Gilberto Gierbolini-Ortiz, Senior U.S. District Judge]
                                              __________________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                               Selya, Boudin and Stahl,
                                   Circuit Judges.
                                   ______________

                                 ____________________

            Arthur  R.  Silen  and  Roberts  &   Newman,  P.A.  on  brief  for
            _________________       __________________________
        appellant.
            Guillermo   Gil,   United   States   Attorney,   and  Charles   E.
            _______________                                       ____________
        Fitzwilliam,   Assistant  U.S.   Attorney,  on   Motion  for   Summary
        ___________
        Disposition for appellee.

                                 ____________________

                                 ____________________

                 Per Curiam.  Defendant's counsel has submitted an Anders
                 __________                                        ______

            brief and  motion to  withdraw, asserting that  there are  no

            meritorious issues to  be raised  on appeal.   See Anders  v.
                                                           ___ ______

            State  of California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); 1st Cir. Loc.
            ____________________

            R. 46.4(a)(4).  Defendant has not filed a separate brief, and

            the  government  has  moved  for summary  dismissal  of  this

            appeal.   As  required by  Anders, we  have conducted  a full
                                       ______

            examination of  the proceedings.  Based  on that examination,

            we  conclude  that  this appeal  is  wholly  frivolous  as it

            presents no issue having an arguable basis in law or fact.  

                 The   undisputed   facts   amply   support   defendant's

            conviction of the crimes charged, and the plea change hearing

            covered  all  the  necessary   points.    Further,  defendant

            received the benefit of the safety valve provision, 18 U.S.C.

              3553(f).  The court properly proceeded under the sentencing

            guidelines to calculate the base offense level for the amount

            of  cocaine involved and  to give  defendant the  full three-

            level credit for his acceptance of responsibility.  Defendant

            received  the minimum  sentence and  release terms  under the

            applicable  guidelines range.   Hence,  there is  no arguable

            appellate  issue  as  to defendant's  conviction,  plea,  and

            sentence.

                 Moreover,  no appealable issue  arises as to defendant's

            requests for an additional downward adjustment or  departure.

            Defendant  did not  pursue those  requests at  the sentencing

                                         -2-

            hearing,  so they  may  be deemed  waived.   In  any case  he

            presented  no particular facts  justifying such an adjustment

            or departure based  on either his role in the  offense or his

            family responsibilities.   

                 Counsel's motion to withdraw is granted, and appellant's
                                                 _______

            conviction and sentence are  affirmed.  See 1st Cir.  Loc. R.
                                         ________   ___

            27.1.

                                         -3-