Court Opinion

ID: 2965147
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:36:02.747879+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:02:18.995200
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ____________________

        No. 97-1685

                                    UNITED STATES,

                                      Appellee,

                                          v.

                                     DAVID GELL,

                                Defendant, Appellant.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                              FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

                     [Hon. D. Brock Hornby, U.S. District Judge]
                                            ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                               Boudin, Stahl and Lynch,
                                   Circuit Judges.
                                   ______________

                                 ____________________

            Thomas V. Laprade and Lambert, Coffin, Rudman & Hochman on brief
            _________________     _________________________________
        for appellant.
            Jay P. McCloskey, United States Attorney, Margaret D. McGaughey,
            ________________                          _____________________
        and Helene Kazanjian Assistant United States Attorneys, on brief for
        appellee.

                                 ____________________

                                   February 4, 1998
                                 ____________________

                      Per Curiam.  We have thoroughly reviewed the record
                      __________

            on appeal and the submissions  of the parties, and we affirm.

            Since  the government's witness  at sentencing testified that

            he had purchased at least  five kilograms of cocaine from the

            appellant  during 1995  alone, and  that  appellant had  sold

            cocaine to the  witness on several other occasions, there was

            no  clear error  in the  sentencing  court's conclusion  that

            appellant  was responsible for  the distribution of  at least

            five kilograms.  United States  v. Lindia, 82 F.3d 1154, 1159
                             ________________________

            (1st  Cir.  1996)  (sentencing  court  must make  credibility

            determinations, and reviewing court will only set those aside

            for  clear  error).    It  is  apparent  from  the sentencing

            transcript and  from the sentencing court's written statement

            of reasons  that the court  relied on that evidence.   United
                                                                   ______

            States v. Van,  87 F.3d 1 (1st  Cir. 1996).  Thus,  the court
            _____________

            properly adopted  a  base offense  level of  32, pursuant  to

            U.S.S.G.   2D1.1(c)(4).

                 Affirmed.  Loc. R. 27.1.
                 _________

                                         -2-