USCA1 Opinion
March 6, 1996 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 95-2128
UNITED STATES,
Appellee,
v.
HILARIO MATEO-SALAS,
Defendant, Appellant.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO
[Hon. Carmen Consuelo Cerezo, U.S. District Judge] ___________________
____________________
Before
Torruella, Chief Judge, ___________
Cyr and Stahl, Circuit Judges. ______________
____________________
Julio Fontanet Maldonado on brief for appellant. ________________________
Guillermo Gil, United States Attorney, Miguel A. Pereira, _______________ ___________________
Assistant U.S. Attorney, and Jose A. Quiles Espinosa, Senior ___________________________
Litigation Counsel, on brief for appellee.
____________________
____________________
Per Curiam. The judgment is summarily affirmed. Loc. __________
R. 27.1.
1. As defendant acknowledges, the court was not bound
by the version of facts attached to the plea agreement,
U.S.S.G. 6B1.4(d), or the plea agreement itself.
Consequently, the court was free to consider an adjustment
under 2D1.1(b)(1). As defendant has neither argued that
such an adjustment was unsupported by the evidence nor
furnished a transcript of the evidentiary hearing, we do not
consider the matter further.
2. Having failed to show that he ever requested a
downward departure, defendant may not now premise error on
the court's failure to depart. United States v. Field, 39 _______________________
F.3d 15, 21 (1st Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 1806 ____________
(1995).
Affirmed. ________
-2-