United States v. Romero Medina

February 20, 1996 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION] UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT No. 95-1653 UNITED STATES, Appellee, v. RICARDO ROMERO MEDINA, Defendant, Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO [Hon. Hector M. Laffitte, U.S. District Judge] Before Selya, Cyr, and Lynch, Circuit Judges. Frank D. Inserni on brief for appellant. Guillermo Gil, United States Attorney, Jeanette Mercado-Rios, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Nelson Perez-Sosa, Assistant U.S. Attorney, and Jose A. Quiles-Espinosa, Senior Litigation Counsel, on brief for appellee. Per Curiam. We have carefully reviewed the record and briefs. We conclude that the sentencing judge's remarks, in context, show that the judge did not misapprehend his legal authority to depart were extraordinary family or other special circumstances presented. Instead, the judge made a discretionary determination that the circumstances were not sufficiently unusual to take the case out of the heartland and therefore did not warrant a departure. In these circumstances, we lack jurisdiction to review the decision not to depart. See United States v. Romero, 32 F.3d 641, 652-54 (1st Cir. 1994); United States v. LeBlanc, 24 F.3d 340, 348-49 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 250 (1994). Nor did the court abuse its discretion in denying defendant's late request for a continuance. Appeal dismissed. Loc. R. 27.1. -2-