United States v. Gray ( 1998 )

USCA1 Opinion

      [NOT FOR PUBLICATION--NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]

                 United States Court of Appeals

                     For the First Circuit











No. 98-1546



                          UNITED STATES,



                            Appellee,



                                v.



               ALTON N. GRAY, JR., a/k/a DAN GRAY,



                      Defendant, Appellant.







           APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT



                FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE



            [Hon. Shane Devine, Senior District Judge]







                              Before



                     Torruella, Chief Judge,

               Selya and Boudin, Circuit Judges.









     Alton N. Gray, Jr. on brief pro se.

     Paul M. Gagnon, United States Attorney and Jean B. Weld,

Assistant U.S. Attorney on Motion for Summary Disposition.











December 1, 1998

















            Per Curiam.  We have reviewed carefully the record in

    this case, including the briefs of the parties.  We affirm.

              Since the record indicates that Gray received notice

    of the government's impending seizure of the property at 412

    Granite Street both in his indictment and in his plea

    agreement, his claim that he was not given adequate notice is

    without merit.  Moreover, there is nothing in the record to

    indicate that, with the exception of a "hot tub and spa" and a

    "solar dome for the spa," any of the items sought by Gray were

    ever seized by the government.  While the record indicates that

    the spa and its dome were seized, as appurtenances to the

    property they were properly returned to the bank which held the

    mortgage on 421 Granite Street.  In any event, any claim Gray

    might have had to these items was abandoned in his plea

    agreement.

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