United States v. Jaramillo

Opinion

USCA1 Opinion

October 5, 1993
                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ___________________

No. 93-1289

UNITED STATES,

                                      Appellee,

                                          v.

                              HERNANDO DUQUE JARAMILLO,

                                Defendant, Appellant.

__________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

[Hon. Raymond L. Acosta, U.S. District Judge]
                                             ___________________

                                 ___________________

                                        Before

                                Cyr, Boudin and Stahl,
                                   Circuit Judges.
                                   ______________

                                 ___________________

               Hernando Duque Jaramillo, on brief pro se.
               ________________________
               Charles  E. Fitzwilliam,  United  States  Attorney, Jose  A.
               _______________________                             ________
          Quiles-Espinosa, Senior  Litigation Counsel, and  Warren Vazquez,
          _______________                                   ______________
          Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.

__________________

                                  __________________

Per  Curiam.    On  January   16,  1990,  appellant
                      ___________

            Hernando Duque-Jaramillo was sentenced to 60 months in prison

            for drug offenses.  At sentencing, Duque-Jaramillo received a

            two-level reduction  in base offense level  for acceptance of

            responsibility.   Effective  November  1,  1992,  the  United

            States Sentencing  Commission amended sentencing  guideline  

            3E1.1  to permit  an additional  one-level reduction  in base

            offense  level  for   persons  eligible  for  the   two-level

            reduction for acceptance  of responsibility.  Duque-Jaramillo

            sought  to  reduce  his  sentence  pursuant  to  the  amended

            guideline,  claiming  that the  amendment  should be  applied

            retroactively.    The  district  court  denied  his  request.

            Because we have decided that the amendment in question is not

            retroactive, see DeSouza v. United  States, 995 F.2d 323, 324
                         ___________    ______________

            (1st Cir.  1993), we affirm  the district  court's denial  of

            Duque-Jaramillo's  request for  a  sentence  reduction  under

            amended   3E1.1.

                      Affirmed.
                      _________

-2-