Carpio Reyes v. United States

USCA1 Opinion









December 8, 1992 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

___________________


No. 92-1831




PABLO CARPIO-REYES,

Petitioner,

v.

UNITED STATES,

Respondent.


__________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO


[Hon. Juan M. Perez-Gimenez, U.S. District Judge]
___________________

___________________

Before

Breyer, Chief Judge,
___________
Torruella and Cyr, Circuit Judges.
______________

___________________

Pablo Carpio-Reyes on brief pro se.
__________________
Daniel F. Lopez-Romo, United States Attorney, Edwin O.
______________________ ________
Vazquez, Assistant United States Attorney, and Jose A. Quiles-
_______ ________________
Espinosa on Motion for Summary Disposition and Memorandum of Law
________
in Support.



__________________

__________________
















Per Curiam. In view of the Supreme Court's recent
__________

decision in United States v. Wilson, 112 S. Ct. 1351 (1992), which
_______________________

concluded that it is the Attorney General -- and not the court --

who decides whether time spent in detention will be credited

towards a sentence, the district court properly denied

appellant's motion for credit for time spent on bond.

Affirmed.
________