USCA1 Opinion

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
                                 ____________________

        No. 93-2156
          
                                    EDWIN SANCHEZ,
                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                              UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                 Defendant, Appellee.

                                 ____________________

        No. 93-2157
                                   RAFAEL SANCHEZ,
                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                              UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                 Defendant, Appellee.
                                   ________________

                    APPEALS FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

                   [Hon. Douglas P. Woodlock, U.S. District Judge]
                                              ___________________

                                  _________________

                                        Before

                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________
                           Selya and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
                                            ______________

                                 ____________________

            Edwin Sanchez on brief pro se.
            _____________
            Cheryl J. Sturm on brief for appellant Rafael Sanchez.
            _______________
            Donald  K. Stern,  United States  Attorney, and  Heidi E. Brieger,
            ________________                                 ________________
        Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.

                                 ____________________
                                  November 29, 1994
                                 ____________________























                      Per Curiam.   The  district court's  denial of  the
                      __________

            motions to  vacate sentence under  28 U.S.C.   2255  filed by

            appellants  Edwin  and  Rafael Sanchez  is  affirmed  for the
                                                        ________

            reasons stated  in the  district court's  September 14,  1993

            memorandum and order.











































                                         -2-