USCA1 Opinion

                                 NOT FOR PUBLICATION



                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT



                                 ____________________





        No. 96-1646



                                    UNITED STATES,



                                      Appellee,



                                          v.



                                    KHAMTAN SINE,



                                Defendant, Appellant.



                                 ____________________





                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT



                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND



                       [Hon. Mary M. Lisi, U.S. District Judge]
                                           ___________________



                                 ____________________



                                        Before



                                Selya, Cyr and Boudin,

                                   Circuit Judges.
                                   ______________



                                 ____________________



            Thomas G. Briody on brief for appellant.
            ________________

            Sheldon Whitehouse,  United States Attorney,  Margaret E.  Curran,
            __________________                            ___________________

        Assistant  United States  Attorney,  and Zechariah  Chafee,  Assistant
                                                 _________________

        United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.





                                 ____________________



                                   February 5, 1997

                                 ____________________



































                 Per  Curiam.   Khamtan  Sine appeals  from the  sentence
                 ___________



            imposed  following   his  guilty   plea  to  two   counts  of



            distributing  crack cocaine.    Appellant's sole  argument is



            that  the  district  court   erred  in  concluding  that  the



            government  agent's conduct   --  in requesting  appellant to



            convert  cocaine powder into its crack  form and in assisting



            in  the conversion  on  one occasion  --  did not  amount  to



            "extraordinary misconduct." See United States  v. Montoya, 62
                                        ___ _____________     _______



            F.3d 1, 4  (1st Cir. 1995).  Such a  judgment by the district



            court "is not lightly  to be disregarded." Id.   The district
                                                       ___



            court  did not clearly err in finding that there were neither



            threats  nor  coercion  in this  case.    Nor  was there  any



            indication  of  illegitimate  motives  on  the  part  of  the



            government agent involved.  We  agree with the district court



            that   this   is  a   "garden   variety"   sentencing  factor



            manipulation claim. See id. 
                                ___ ___



                 Appellant's sentence is affirmed.  See Loc. R. 27.1.
                                         ________   ___







































                                         -2-