United States v. Penn

USCA1 Opinion

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]



                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT



                                 ____________________







        No. 97-1276





                                    UNITED STATES,



                                      Appellee,



                                          v.



                                     ALVIN PENN,



                                Defendant, Appellant.



                                 ____________________





                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT



                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS



                      [Hon. Patti B. Saris, U.S. District Judge]
                                            ___________________



                                 ____________________



                                        Before



                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________

                           Stahl and Lynch, Circuit Judges.
                                            ______________



                                 ____________________



            Paul J. Haley on brief for appellant.
            _____________

            Donald K.  Stern, United States Attorney,  and Michael J.  Pelgro,
            ________________                               __________________

        Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.





                                 ____________________



                                   October 14, 1997

                                 ____________________







































                 Per Curiam.    Upon careful  review  of the  briefs  and
                 __________



            record,   we   find  no   merit  in   appellant's  arguments.



            Particularly, we decline appellant's invitation to expand the



            concept of sentence factor manipulation in this case.  As the



            district   court  found,  with  adequate  support,  that  the



            government's  conduct  was  proper  and  that  appellant  was



            predisposed to the drug sales, there was  no cognizable basis



            for a  claim of  sentence factor  manipulation.   See  United
                                                              ___  ______



            States v. Montoya, 62 F.3d 1, 3-4 (1st Cir. 1995).    
            ______    _______



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



































































                                         -2-