USCA1 Opinion

          September 12, 1995    [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]



                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT



                         



                                 ____________________





        No. 94-1523 



                                 CHARLES J. OROPALLO,



                                Plaintiff, Appellant,



                                          v.



                              RONALD L. POWELL, ET AL.,



                                Defendants, Appellees.





                                 ____________________



                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT



                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE





                   [Hon. Steven J. McAuliffe, U.S. District Judge]
                                              ___________________



                                 ____________________



                                        Before



                                Cyr, Boudin and Stahl,

                                   Circuit Judges.
                                   ______________



                                 ____________________



            Charles J. Oropallo on brief pro se.
            ___________________

            Jeffrey  R.  Howard,  Attorney  General,  and  Suzan  M.  Lehmann,
            ___________________                            __________________

        Assistant Attorney General, on brief for appellees.





                                 ____________________





                                 ____________________















































                      Per Curiam.  After review of the briefs and record,
                      __________



            we conclude that the  district court's order is correct.   We



            have  reviewed Appellant  Oropallo's  First Amendment,  honor



            tier  and  retaliation claims  and  find them  to  be without



            merit. The opinion of the district court is affirmed.
                                                        ________