USCA1 Opinion
November 22, 1995 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 95-1138
UNITED STATES,
Appellee,
v.
DENNIS JOHN DiIORIO,
Defendant, Appellant.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
[Hon. Ernest C. Torres, U.S. District Judge] ___________________
____________________
Before
Torruella, Chief Judge, ___________
Selya and Cyr, Circuit Judges. ______________
____________________
Orlando A. Andreoni on brief for appellant. ___________________
Sheldon Whitehouse, United States Attorney, Stephanie S. Browne __________________ ____________________
and Craig N. Moore, Assistant United States Attorneys, on brief for ______________
appellee.
____________________
____________________
Per Curiam. Defendant-appellant Dennis J. DiIorio ___________
pled guilty to a three-count indictment, including possession
of a firearm by a convicted felon. He appeals from his
sentence on the sole ground that the district court erred in
denying a reduction in his base offense level because he
"possessed all ammunition and firearms solely for lawful
sporting purposes or collection. . . ." United States
Sentencing Guidelines, 2K2.1(b)(2) (1994). The burden is
on the defendant to prove by a preponderance of the evidence
that he is entitled to the reduction. United States v. ______________
Cousens, 942 F.2d 800, 802 (1st Cir. 1991). "We review for _______
clear error the district court's factual findings with regard
to the intended purposes of purchasing and possessing the
firearms at issue." Id. ___
Having carefully reviewed the record, including the
transcript from the sentencing hearing, we conclude that it
was not clear error for the district court to find that
appellant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence
that he possessed the gun and ammunition solely for sporting
or collection purposes. The sentencing court's decision not
to accept DiIorio's version of the relevant facts was a
credibility determination best made by the district court,
rather than by this court. See United States v. Wheelwright, ___ _____________ ___________
918 F.2d 226, 228 (1st Cir. 1990). Accordingly, appellant's
sentence is affirmed. See Loc. R. 27.1. ________ ___