March 9, 1993
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
No. 92-2174
UNITED STATES,
Appellee,
v.
VICTOR GONZALEZ,
Defendant, Appellant.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
[Hon. Raymond J. Pettine, Senior U.S. District Judge]
Before
Breyer, Chief Judge,
Torruella and Cyr, Circuit Judges.
Victor Gonzalez on brief pro se.
Lincoln C. Almond, United States Attorney, Margaret E. Curran and
Kenneth P. Madden, Assistant United States Attorneys, on brief for
appellee.
Per Curiam. Contrary to appellant's contention, the
increased maximum penalties and the supervised release
provisions of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, Pub. L. No.
99-570, 100 Stat. 3207 (ADAA) became effective on the date of
the ADAA's enactment, i.e., October 27, 1986. Gozlon-Peretz
v. United States, 498 U.S. 395 (1991). The no-parole
provisions of the ADAA became effective on that date, as
well. United States v. De Los Santos-Himitola, 924 F.2d 380,
381 (1st Cir. 1991). And, although Gozlon-Peretz involved 21
U.S.C. 841 (controlled substances), we have held that its
rationale applies equally to the parallel provisions in 21
U.S.C. 960. Padilla Palacios v. United States, 932 F.2d
31, 33-34 (1st Cir. 1991). The appellant committed
violations of both 21 U.S.C. 841 and 21 U.S.C. 960 in
April 1987. His sentences of 25 years of imprisonment on
each of the four counts, to be served concurrently, and his
sentences of 20 years of supervised release on the two
substantive counts, to be served concurrently, are lawful and
his arguments to the contrary are foreclosed by the above-
cited precedent.
Appellant appears also to argue that amendments to the
penalty provisions of 21 U.S.C. 846 and 963 (the
coordinate conspiracy provisions), enacted on November 18,
1988, were unlawfully applied to him. Even if intended as a
separate argument, however, we have rejected it in a prior
post-conviction appeal brought by one of appellant's co-
defendants. United States v. Sigifredo Gonzalez, No. 90-
1088, slip op. at 3-6 (1st Cir. Sept. 11, 1990). We reject
it here as well for the reasons stated in that Gonzalez
opinion.
The order of the district court denying this post-
conviction motion is affirmed.
Affirmed.
-3-