eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 Federal Courts
 US Court of Appeals Cases
 Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
 1993-03

United States v. Gonzalez ( 1993 )


Menu:
 
  • March 9, 1993
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
No. 92-2174
UNITED STATES,
Appellee,
v.
VICTOR GONZALEZ,
Defendant, Appellant.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
[Hon. Raymond J. Pettine, Senior U.S. District Judge]
Before
Breyer, Chief Judge,
Torruella and Cyr, Circuit Judges.
Victor Gonzalez on brief pro se.
Lincoln C. Almond, United States Attorney, Margaret  E. Curran and
Kenneth P.  Madden, Assistant  United States  Attorneys, on  brief for
appellee.
Per  Curiam.   Contrary to  appellant's contention,  the
increased   maximum  penalties  and  the  supervised  release
provisions  of the Anti-Drug Abuse  Act of 1986,  Pub. L. No.
99-570,
    100 Stat. 3207
     (ADAA) became effective on the date of
the ADAA's enactment, i.e., October 27, 1986.   Gozlon-Peretz
v.  United  States,
    498 U.S. 395
      (1991).    The  no-parole
provisions  of the  ADAA  became effective  on that  date, as
well.  United States v. De Los Santos-Himitola,
    924 F.2d 380
    ,
381 (1st Cir. 1991).  And, although Gozlon-Peretz involved 21
U.S.C.   841 (controlled  substances), we have held that  its
rationale applies equally  to the parallel  provisions in  21
U.S.C.    960.  Padilla  Palacios v. United  States,
    932 F.2d 31
    ,  33-34   (1st  Cir.  1991).     The  appellant  committed
violations of both  21 U.S.C.    841 and 21  U.S.C.   960  in
April 1987.   His sentences  of 25 years  of imprisonment  on
each of the four  counts, to be served concurrently,  and his
sentences of  20  years  of supervised  release  on  the  two
substantive counts, to be served concurrently, are lawful and
his arguments  to the contrary  are foreclosed by  the above-
cited precedent.
Appellant appears  also to argue that  amendments to the
penalty  provisions  of  21  U.S.C.       846  and  963  (the
coordinate  conspiracy provisions),  enacted on  November 18,
1988, were unlawfully applied to him.  Even  if intended as a
separate argument,  however, we have  rejected it in  a prior
post-conviction  appeal brought  by  one of  appellant's  co-
defendants.   United  States v.  Sigifredo Gonzalez,  No. 90-
1088, slip op.  at 3-6 (1st Cir. Sept. 11,  1990).  We reject
it  here  as well  for the  reasons  stated in  that Gonzalez
opinion.
The  order  of the  district  court  denying this  post-
conviction motion is affirmed.
Affirmed.
-3-