Court Opinion

ID: 2964984
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:33:47.447537+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:02:02.584553
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                              _________________________

          Nos. 97-1681
               97-1682

                              UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                      Appellee,

                                          v.

                                FRANK RICHARD MERLINO,

                                Defendant, Appellant.

                              _________________________

                    APPEALS FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

                   [Hon. Steven J. McAuliffe, U.S. District Judge]
                                              ___________________

                              _________________________

                                        Before

                          Selya and Boudin, Circuit Judges,
                                            ______________

                          and Dowd,* Senior District Judge.
                                     _____________________

                              _________________________

               Bjorn Lange, Assistant Federal Defender, for appellant.
               ___________
               Jean  B. Weld, Assistant  United States Attorney,  with whom
               _____________
          Paul M.  Gagnon, United  States Attorney, was  on brief,  for the
          _______________
          United States.

                              _________________________

                                  November 12, 1997
                              _________________________

          _______________
          *Of the Northern District of Ohio, sitting by designation.

                    Per Curiam.   In these  sentencing appeals    there are
                    Per Curiam.
                    __________

          two, but they  may for practical purposes be treated  as a single

          unit    defendant-appellant Frank Richard Merlino  challenges the

          district  court's use of  an upward  departure under  USSG  4A1.3

          (Nov. 1992).   By order dated  October 9,  1997, we directed  the

          district court to file a  written report amplifying the basis for

          the extent of the  departure.  The court  promptly complied.   We

          then  afforded   the  parties  an  opportunity  for  supplemental

          briefing.

                    We have  carefully examined  the record,  including but

          not  limited  to   the  presentence  investigation  report,   the

          transcript  of the sentencing  hearing, and the  district court's

          supplementary  report of its  departure findings.   We  have also

          studied the  parties'  briefs,  entertained  oral  argument,  and

          consulted  the  applicable  legal   authorities.    This   review

          persuades  us beyond serious question that the district court had

          both a solid factual basis for concluding that Merlino's criminal

          history score  substantially underrepresented  his criminal  past

          and  a sound legal  basis for the ensuing  upward departure.  See
                                                                        ___

          United States  v. Brewster, No.  97-1448, slip op. at  16-18 (1st
          _____________     ________

          Cir. Oct.  2, 1997)  (describing requirements  for invoking  USSG

           4A1.3); United States v. Black, 78 F.3d 1, 9-10 (1st Cir. 1996);
                   _____________    _____

          United  States  v. Aymelek,  926  F.2d  64,  73 (1st  Cir.  1991)
          ______________     _______

          (similar).  Our review also  convinces us that the district court

          followed the proper protocol and  did not abuse its discretion in

          determining the  extent of the  departure.  See  Brewster, supra,
                                                      ___  ________  _____

                                          2

          slip op. at 20-23 (discussing reasonableness requirement for such

          departures); United States v. Hardy, 99 F.3d 1242, 1253 (1st Cir.
                       _____________    _____

          1996) (similar).

                    Because these determinations  are heavily influenced by

          the particular facts  of Merlino's case, we  do not think that  a

          detailed discussion would serve a  useful purpose.  From the very

          inception of the federal sentencing guidelines, we have cautioned

          that "[s]entencing appeals  prosecuted . . . in  the tenuous hope

          that lightning may strike ought not to be dignified with exegetic

          opinions, intricate factual synthesis, or full-dress explications

          of accepted legal principles."  United States v. Ruiz-Garcia, 886
                                          _____________    ___________

          F.2d 474, 477 (1st Cir. 1989).  We then wrote, in words that have

          particular pertinence  today:  "Assuredly,  a criminal  defendant

          deserves his  day in  court;  but we  see no  purpose in  wasting

          overtaxed judicial resources razing castles in the air."  Id.
                                                                    ___

                    We need go no  further.  This case   which  presents no

          fairly  debatable question     is a  paradigmatic  example of  an

          instance in which summary disposition is appropriate.

          Affirmed.  See Loc. R. 27.1.
          Affirmed.  See Loc. R. 27.1.
          ________   ___

                                          3