United States v. Roy

U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

United States v. Roy

Opinion

USCA1 Opinion









[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________

No. 95-1697

UNITED STATES,

Appellee,

v.

DONALD ROY,

Defendant, Appellant.


____________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

[Hon. Morton A. Brody, U.S. District Judge] ___________________

____________________

Before

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

____________________

Tina Schneider on brief for appellant. ______________
Jay P. McCloskey, United States Attorney, Margaret D. McGaughey, ________________ ______________________
Assistant U.S. Attorney, and Gregory A. Campbell, Special Assistant ___________________
U.S. Attorney, on brief for appellee.


____________________

March 12, 1996
____________________





















Per Curiam. Defendant Donald Roy contends that the ___________

district court erred in failing to make a downward departure

under 5K2.13 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines

(for diminished capacity) and under U.S.S.G. 5K2.16 (for

voluntary disclosure). Roy's failure to request a downward

departure under either section in the district court

forecloses our consideration of the issue. See United States ___ _____________

v. Field, 39 F.3d 15, 21 (1st Cir. 1994), cert. denied, ___ _____ ____________

U.S. ___, 115 S. Ct. 1806 (1995).

To the extent Roy is arguing that he received

ineffective assistance of counsel because his attorney did

not move for a departure under 5K2.13, 5K2.16, the

argument is without merit, for there was scant, if any,

evidentiary support for a departure. To the extent Roy may

be premising an ineffective assistance claim on counsel's

failure adequately to develop the record, the matter is not

presently reviewable. See United States v. Jadusingh, 12 ___ _____________ _________

F.3d 1162, 1169-70 (1st Cir. 1994).

The sentence is summarily affirmed. See Loc. R. 27.1. _________ ________ ___















-2-






Reference

Status
Published