United States v. Archibold-Bush

Opinion

USCA1 Opinion

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                              _________________________

          No.  93-1069

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                      Appellee,

                                          v.

                        WENDELL ARCHIBOLD BUSCH a/k/a "ARCHI,"

                                Defendant, Appellant.

_________________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

                   [Hon. Gilberto Gierbolini, U.S. District Judge]
                                              ___________________

_________________________

                                        Before

                                Selya, Circuit Judge,
                                       _____________

                      Aldrich and Coffin, Senior Circuit Judges.
                                          _____________________

_________________________

               Joseph C. Laws, Jr. on brief for appellant.
               ___________________
               Charles  E. Fitzwilliam, United States Attorney and Jorge E.
               _______________________                             ________
          Vega-Pacheco,  Assistant United  States  Attorney,  on brief  for
          ____________
          appellee.

_________________________

                                  September 14, 1993

_________________________

Per  Curiam.  Having  carefully reviewed the  record of
                    Per  Curiam
                    ___________

          appellant's trial, we are fully satisfied that, taking  the facts

          in the light most congenial to the government, as we must on this

          appeal, see, e.g.,  United States v. Maraj, 947  F.2d 520, 522-23
                  ___  ____   _____________    _____

          (1st Cir.  1991), the judge  and jury could  supportably, indeed,

          comfortably,  have  found  federal jurisdiction,  guilt,  and  an

          absence  of cognizable duress.  Moreover, contrary to appellant's

          importuning,  the  acquittal  of  various codefendants  does  not

          require a like result  in his case.  See, e.g.,  United States v.
                                               ___  ____   _____________

          Bucuvalas, 909 F.2d 593, 594-96 (1990).
          _________

                    We have examined appellant's remaining contentions  and

          find them meritless.

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

2