USCA1 Opinion

      [NOT FOR PUBLICATION--NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]

                 United States Court of Appeals

                     For the First Circuit











No. 98-1224



                          UNITED STATES,



                            Appellee,



                                v.



                       VERA YENNY MENJIVAR,



                      Defendant, Appellant.







           APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT



                FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS



        [Hon. George A. O'Toole, Jr., U.S. District Judge]







                              Before



                    Selya, Stahl and Lynch,

Circuit Judges.                 

                                

                                





     Diana L. Maldonado on brief for appellant.

     Donald K. Stern, United States Attorney, and Diana K. Lloyd,

Assistant U.S. Attorney, on brief for appellee.









SEPTEMBER 24, 1998









                                

                                









                                             Per Curiam.  Upon careful review of the briefs and record, we find

no basis for defendant's contention that she was not afforded her right

of allocution.  As required by Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(c)(3)(C), "before

imposing sentence," the district court gave defendant an opportunity "to

make a statement and to present any information in mitigation of the

sentence."  The district court did not violate Rule 32 by considering

defendant's motion for a downward departure before hearing allocution. 

See United States v. Diaz-Alvarez, 46 F.3d 784, 785 (8th Cir. 1995). 

Further, nothing in the record suggests to us that the district court

failed to give due consideration to defendant's statement.  See United

States v. Mata-Grullon, 887 F.3d 23, 25 (1st Cir. 1989).

     Affirmed.  See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.



























                                  -2-