United States v. Gonzalez

Opinion

March 9, 1993 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

No. 92-2174

UNITED STATES,

Appellee,

v.

VICTOR GONZALEZ,

Defendant, Appellant.

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

[Hon. Raymond J. Pettine, Senior U.S. District Judge]

Before

Breyer, Chief Judge,

Torruella and Cyr, Circuit Judges.

Victor Gonzalez on brief pro se.

Lincoln C. Almond, United States Attorney, Margaret E. Curran and

Kenneth P. Madden, Assistant United States Attorneys, on brief for

appellee.

Per Curiam. Contrary to appellant's contention, the

increased maximum penalties and the supervised release

provisions of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, Pub. L. No.

99-570, 100 Stat. 3207 (ADAA) became effective on the date of

the ADAA's enactment, i.e., October 27, 1986. Gozlon-Peretz

v. United States, 498 U.S. 395 (1991). The no-parole

provisions of the ADAA became effective on that date, as

well. United States v. De Los Santos-Himitola, 924 F.2d 380,

381 (1st Cir. 1991). And, although Gozlon-Peretz involved 21

U.S.C. 841 (controlled substances), we have held that its

rationale applies equally to the parallel provisions in 21

U.S.C. 960. Padilla Palacios v. United States, 932 F.2d

31, 33-34 (1st Cir. 1991). The appellant committed

violations of both 21 U.S.C. 841 and 21 U.S.C. 960 in

April 1987. His sentences of 25 years of imprisonment on

each of the four counts, to be served concurrently, and his

sentences of 20 years of supervised release on the two

substantive counts, to be served concurrently, are lawful and

his arguments to the contrary are foreclosed by the above-

cited precedent.

Appellant appears also to argue that amendments to the

penalty provisions of 21 U.S.C. 846 and 963 (the

coordinate conspiracy provisions), enacted on November 18,

1988, were unlawfully applied to him. Even if intended as a

separate argument, however, we have rejected it in a prior

post-conviction appeal brought by one of appellant's co-

defendants. United States v. Sigifredo Gonzalez, No. 90-

1088, slip op. at 3-6 (1st Cir. Sept. 11, 1990). We reject

it here as well for the reasons stated in that Gonzalez

opinion.

The order of the district court denying this post-

conviction motion is affirmed.

Affirmed.

-3-