February 14, 1996
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
No. 95-1323
UNITED STATES,
Appellee,
v.
JAMIL KHOURY,
Defendant, Appellant.
ERRATA SHEET
The opinion of this Court issued on February 12, 1996 is
amended as follows:
On the cover sheet, last line before the date, change
"appellee" to "appellant."
February 12, 1996 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
No. 95-1323
UNITED STATES,
Appellee,
v.
JAMIL KHOURY,
Defendant, Appellant.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Hon. Nathaniel M. Gorton, U.S. District Judge]
Before
Torruella, Chief Judge,
Cyr and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
Daniel S. Tarlow, Richard D. Glovsky and Glovsky, Tarlow &
Milberg on brief for appellant.
2
Per Curiam. After carefully reviewing the record,
we conclude the appeal is wholly without merit and allow
counsel's motion to withdraw. The guilty plea colloquy fully
complied with Fed. R. Civ. P. 11, and there is no basis on
the present record for concluding that the plea was not
voluntarily, intelligently, and understandingly entered. The
district court's failure to warn defendant of the immigration
consequences of his plea is not a basis for relief. See,
e.g., United States v. Quin, 836 F. 2d 654, 655 (1st Cir.
1987); Nunez Cordero v. United States, 533 F.2d 723, 726
(1st Cir. 1976).
Outlining several claims, appellate counsel asks
that we direct the district court to appoint counsel to file
a 2255 petition. We decline to do so. The district court
is in the best position to make the initial determination
whether counsel should be appointed.
The judgment is affirmed and counsel's motion to
withdraw is granted.
3