United States v. Hearn

USCA1 Opinion









June 5, 1996
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

____________________


No. 95-2340

UNITED STATES,

Appellee,

v.

JOSEPH HEARN,

Defendant, Appellant.


____________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

[Hon. Steven J. McAuliffe, U.S. District Judge] ___________________

____________________

Before

Torruella, Chief Judge, ___________
Boudin and Lynch, Circuit Judges. ______________

____________________

Jonathan R. Saxe and Twomey & Sisti Law Offices on brief for _________________ ____________________________
appellant.
Paul M. Gagnon, United States Attorney, and Jean B. Weld, ________________ ______________
Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.


____________________


____________________



Per Curiam. Defendant pled guilty and was ___________














sentenced to a 188-month term of imprisonment for violation

of 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1), 846. On appeal he argues that the

court erred in rejecting his argument of "sentencing factor

manipulation" and refusing to exclude from the calculation of

his sentence certain quantities of "crack" cocaine. After a

careful review of the parties' briefs, the hearing transcript

and other parts of the record, we find no "clear error" in

the district court's determination that defendant failed to

sustain his burden of proving entitlement to such a

reduction. There was no proof of extraordinary governmental

misconduct. See United States v. Montoya, 62 F.3d 1, 4 (1st ___ _____________ _______

Cir. 1995).

As no substantial question is presented for appeal,

the judgment below is affirmed. See Loc. R. 27.1. ________ ___

























-3-