Million v. United States

U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Million v. United States

Opinion

USCA1 Opinion




June 8, 1992 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]






____________________


No. 92-1131

EUGENE A. MILLION V,

Petitioner, Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent, Appellee.


____________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

[Hon. Gene Carter, U.S. District Judge]
___________________

____________________

Before

Breyer, Chief Judge,
___________
Campbell, Senior Circuit Judge,
____________________
and Cyr, Circuit Judge.
_____________

____________________

Eugene A. Million V on brief pro se.
___________________
Richard S. Cohen, United States Attorney, Margaret D. McGaughey,
________________ ______________________
Assistant United States Attorney, and James L. McCarthy, Assistant
__________________
United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.


____________________


____________________























Per Curiam. 1. Appellant contends he was
___________

incorrectly placed in criminal history category II, rather

than I, for sentencing purposes. The PSR listed two prior

convictions. The first, labelled "Juvenile Adjudications,"

was for theft. Appellant received a $100 fine ($70

suspended) and a $26.01 restitution order to Zayre's. The

second, labelled "criminal conviction," was for unauthorized

use of property (automobile). Appellant was fined $100 ($50

of which was suspended). Appellant argues that these are

very minor offenses -- mere convenience pleas -- and should

not be counted. His attack is threefold.

First, he says he intended to have the owner of the

automobile testify at sentencing that defendant had had

continuing permission to use the vehicle. The sentencing

transcript indicates, however, that the promised witness did

not appear at sentencing. Appellant did not seek a

continuance on that ground or procure a letter or affidavit

from the car owner. Appellant may not now complain of what

he failed to show at sentencing.

Second, appellant argues that U.S.S.G.

4A1.2(c)(1) specifically excludes the two offenses from

consideration in computing criminal history. Appellant

misreads the section. The section commences by stating that

"all felony offenses are counted" and that "[s]entences for

misdemeanor and petty offenses are counted, except as



-2-















follows." Exclusions are then listed. Appellant's theft and

unauthorized use offenses are not in the list of exclusions

and are not similar to any in the list.

Third, appellant contends that the juvenile

adjudication for theft is excluded under U.S.S.G.

4A1.2(c)(2), which states that "[j]uvenile status offenses

and truancy" and "offenses similar to them, by whatever name

. . . known, are never counted." We "look to the substance

of the underlying state offense in order to determine whether

it falls within the proscription [of 4A1.2(c)(2)]." United
______

States v. Unger, 915 F.2d 759, 763 (1st Cir. 1990), cert.
______ _____ _____

denied, 111 S.Ct. 1005 (1991). In Unger, the conduct
______ _____

underlying the juvenile adjudications consisted of breaking

and entering with intent to commit larceny, receiving stolen

goods, and assault and battery. We concluded that "[u]nder

no stretch of the imagination can these malefactions be

considered 'status offenses' like, say, hitchhiking, truancy,

loitering, or vagrancy." Ibid. The same is true here.
____

Appellant's offense, whether euphemistically labelled

shoplifting (as appellant phrases it) or theft (as stated in

the PSR) is materially more serious than a mere status

offense.

2. To the extent appellant now attempts to raise

ineffective assistance of counsel claims, we do not consider

them as they were not presented in the 2255 petition below.



-3-















3. We have considered all of appellant's other

arguments and find them without merit substantially for the

reasons stated by the government in its comprehensive brief.

Affirmed.
________













































-4-







Reference

Status
Published