United States v. Barry

USCA1 Opinion

       [NOT FOR PUBLICATION–NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]

                 United States Court of Appeals

                     For the First Circuit











No. 98-1869



                          UNITED STATES,



                            Appellee,



                                v.



                         ROBERT M. BARRY,



                      Defendant, Appellant.







           APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT



                FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS



         [Hon. Nathaniel M. Gorton, U.S. District Judge]







                              Before



                    Selya, Boudin and Lynch,

                        Circuit Judges.

                                

                                

                                

                                

     Robert M. Barry on brief pro se.

     Donald K. Stern, United States Attorney, and Robert E.

Richardson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, on brief for appellee.











September 16, 1999







                                

                                



  

  

            Per Curiam.  Defendant Robert M. Barry appeals from

  the denial of his motion to correct his sentence, filed under

  Fed. R. Crim. P. 36.  We have carefully reviewed the record and

  the parties' briefs and conclude that the addition of

  restitution in the written judgment of conviction was

  authorized by Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(c).  See United States v.

  Uccio, 917 F.2d 80 (2d Cir. 1990).  Because the district court

  had the power to make this correction, there is no error in the

  written judgment and defendant is not entitled to its

  correction.

            The judgment of the district court is affirmed.  See

  Local Rule 27.1.