Beniot v. Weld ( 1992 )

USCA1 Opinion

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]






                                 ____________________

          No. 92-1441

                                    GERARD BENOIT,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                               WILLIAM F. WELD, ET AL.,

                                Defendants, Appellees.

                                 ___________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

                     [Hon. A. David Mazzone, U.S. District Judge]
                                             ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                              Torruella, Circuit Judge,
                                         _____________

                      Brown* and Bownes, Senior Circuit Judges.
                                         _____________________

                                 ____________________

                Matthew Cobb for appellant.
                ____________
                Jon  Laramore,   Assistant  Attorney   General,  Government
                _____________
          Bureau, with  whom Scott  Harshbarger, Attorney  General, was  on
                             __________________
          brief for appellees.



                                 ____________________

                                   October 21, 1992
                                 ____________________




                              
          ____________________

          *  Of the Fifth Circuit, sitting by designation.











                    Per Curiam.   Upon  full review of  the record  in this
                    __________

          case, and having  considered the briefs and oral  argument of the

          parties,  the  decision of  the  district court  is  affirmed for

          substantially the  same reasons  as are stated  in said  opinion.

          See Benoit  v. Weld,  et al.,  No.  91-12314 (D.  Mass. March  5,
          ___ ______     _____________

          1992).

                    Affirmed.  Costs to appellees.
                    ________











































                                         -2-