United States v. St. Germaine

USCA1 Opinion









June 21, 1993 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit




_________________________

No. 92-2397

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Appellee,

v.

ALLAN W. ST. GERMAINE,
a/k/a ALLAN W. ST. GERMAIN,
Defendant, Appellant.


_________________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

[Hon. Gene Carter, U.S. District Judge]
___________________


_________________________


Before

Selya, Cyr and Boudin,

Circuit Judges.
______________


_________________________


Peter Clifford for appellant.
______________
Nicholas M. Gess, Assistant United States Attorney, with
_________________
whom Jay P. McCloskey, United States Attorney, was on brief, for
________________
appellee.


_________________________





_________________________


















Per Curiam. Having carefully reviewed the record
Per Curiam
__________

of the proceedings below, we conclude, without serious

question, that, before the district court, the


appellant withdrew any objection to the proposed

determination that he should be sentenced as an armed

career criminal under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1),

924(e)(1). Because that issue was not preserved below,


we will not address it here. See, e.g., United States
___ ____ _____________

v. Dietz, 950 F.2d 50, 55 (1st Cir. 1991) ("We have
_____

repeatedly ruled, in connection with sentencing as in


other contexts, that arguments not seasonably addressed

to the trial court may not be raised for the first time

in an appellate venue.") (collecting cases). In any


event, we are satisfied that appellant's prior criminal

record brought him firmly within the ambit of the Armed

Career Criminal Act. See, e.g., Taylor v. United
___ ____ ______ ______

States, 495 U.S. 575, 600 (1990); United States v.
______ _____________


Anderson, 921 F.2d 335, 339-40 (1st Cir. 1990).
________

We have examined appellant's remaining contentions

and find them meritless. Consequently, we need go no

further.







2














Affirmed. See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.
________ ___




















































3