-
USCA1 Opinion
January 8, 1993 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
_________________________
No. 92-2112
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Appellee,
v.
BEATRIZ JUNQUERA DE RIVERA,
Defendant, Appellant.
_________________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE
[Hon. Morton A. Brody, U.S. District Judge]
___________________
_________________________
Before
Torruella, Selya and Stahl,
Circuit Judges.
______________
_________________________
J. Hilary Billings for appellant.
__________________
Margaret D. McGaughey, Assistant United States Attorney,
______________________
with whom Richard S. Cohen, United States Attorney, and Jay P.
________________ ______
McCloskey, Assistant United States Attorney, were on brief, for
_________
the United States.
_________________________
_________________________
Per Curiam. This is a guideline sentencing appeal. We
__________
have carefully reviewed the appellant's objections to the
district court's determination of her offense level and guideline
sentencing range (which, in turn, led to her sentence). Having
in mind, particularly, that a criminal defendant must carry the
burden of proving her entitlement to downward adjustments in the
presumptively applicable offense level, see, e.g., United States
___ ____ _____________
v. Ocasio, 914 F.2d 330, 332 (1st Cir. 1990), and that a
______
deferential standard of review applies to factbound
determinations under the sentencing guidelines, see, e.g., United
___ ____ ______
States v. Ruiz, 905 F.2d 499, 508 (1st Cir. 1990) (holding that
______ ____
"where there is more than one plausible view of the
circumstances, the sentencing court's choice among supportable
alternatives cannot be clearly erroneous"), we see no sound basis
for overturning the lower court's findings.
We need go no further. We have said before that
"[s]entencing appeals prosecuted . . . in the tenuous hope that
lightning may strike ought not to be dignified with exegetic
opinions, intricate factual synthesis, or full-dress explications
of accepted legal principles." United States v. Ruiz-Garcia, 886
_____________ ___________
F.2d 474, 477 (1st Cir. 1989). So it is here.
The judgment of conviction and the sentence imposed are
The judgment of conviction and the sentence imposed are
_______________________________________________________
affirmed. See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.
affirmed. See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.
_________ ___
2
Document Info
Docket Number: 92-2112
Filed Date: 1/8/1993
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 9/21/2015