July 8, 1996
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
No. 95-1403
UNITED STATES,
Appellee,
v.
RAFAEL TAVARES,
Defendant, Appellant.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Hon. Patti B. Saris, U.S. District Judge]
Before
Selya, Cyr and Boudin,
Circuit Judges.
Ronald Ian Segal on brief for appellant.
Donald K. Stern, United States Attorney, Paula J. DeGiacomo and
George W. Vien, Assistant United States Attorneys, on brief for
appellee.
Per Curiam. Defendant pled guilty and was
sentenced to a six-year term of imprisonment for a violation
of 21 U.S.C. 846. On appeal he argues for the first time
that the district court erred in permitting the government to
point out an error in the presentence investigation report
(PSI) after the time for doing so pursuant to Fed. R. Crim.
P. 32(b)(6)(B) had passed. This objection not having been
made below, it is reviewed for plain error only. See United
States v. Peppe, 80 F.3d 19, 22 (1st Cir. 1996). After
careful review of the parties' briefs and the entire record
below, we find no error. Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P.
32(b)(6)(D), the district court had the discretion to
consider at the time of sentencing the government's objection
to the PSI's manifestly mistaken reference to grams of
cocaine rather than kilograms. Based on the entire record of
sentencing, which reveals the defendant unquestionably
accountable for up to 100 kilograms of cocaine, we find no
abuse of discretion in the district court's implicit finding
of good cause to allow the government's tardy objection.
Affirmed. See Loc. R. 27.1.
-3-