[NOT FOR PUBLICATION--NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT] United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit

No. 98-1296

UNITED STATES,

Appellee,

v.

ENRIQUE ANASTASIO-NAVARRO,

Defendant, Appellant.

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

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

Before

Stahl, Circuit Judge, Coffin, Senior Circuit Judge, and Lipez, Circuit Judge.

Michael A. Tucker on brief for appellant. Margaret E. Curran, United States Attorney and Zechariah Chafee, Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.

October 19, 1998

Per Curiam. Upon careful consideration of the briefs and record, we find no issue for our review. 1. Defendant did not ask the district court for downward departures on the grounds that he now proposes. Defendant thus waived for appeal the issue whether the district court erred in denying departures on those grounds. In any event, the denial of such departures would be within the district court's discretion, and we do not have jurisdiction to review such an exercise of discretion. See United States v. Pierro,

(1st Cir. 1994). There is no reasonable basis for defendant's assertion that the district court misunderstood its authority to depart, and there is no question of law in that regard to be reviewed here. 2. Defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel will not be reviewed on direct appeal. See United States v. Martinez-Martinez,

(1st Cir. 1995). If defendant believes that he has a viable claim in that regard, he may raise it in proceedings under 28 U.S.C. 2255. Affirmed. See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.