June 5, 1996
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
No. 95-1383
No. 95-1941
UNITED STATES,
Appellee,
v.
ANTONIO MEDINA PUERTA,
Defendant, Appellant.
APPEALS FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Hon. Robert E. Keeton, U.S. District Judge]
Before
Selya, Cyr and Lynch,
Circuit Judges.
Antonio Medina Puerta on brief pro se.
Donald K. Stern, United States Attorney, and Timothy Q. Feeley,
Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.
Per Curiam. Appellant Antonio Medina Puerta appeals the
denial by the district court of his motions for a new trial,
pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 33, on the basis of newly
discovered evidence, and for a correction of his sentence,
pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 35. We affirm the decisions of
the district court.
Having carefully reviewed the record in this case, we
find no abuse of the district court's discretion in its
implicit determination that the allegedly newly discovered
evidence presented by appellant was of insufficient weight to
sustain his burden of showing that it would "probably result
in an acquittal upon retrial of the defendant." United
States v. Wright, 625 F.2d 1017, 1019 (1st Cir. 1980).
Appellant also claims that he is entitled to a
correction of his sentence because the government allegedly
miscalculated what his sentence would have been if the
Federal Sentencing Guidelines applied to this case. This
argument is without merit since there is no evidence that the
district court was influenced by the government's calculation
when the court imposed its sentence in this pre-Guidelines
case. Appellant's other arguments regarding sentencing were
not raised in the district court and hence will not be
considered on appeal. United States v. Carrillo-Figueroa, 34
F.3d 33, 39 (1st Cir. 1994).
Affirmed. See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.
-2-