United States v. Ramon Robles

Opinion

USCA1 Opinion

        November 21, 1995       [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]



                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT


____________________


No. 95-1087 



                                    UNITED STATES,



                                      Appellee,



                                          v.



                                 CESAR RAMON ROBLES,



                                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



                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________

                            Selya and Cyr, Circuit Judges.
                                           ______________



                                 ____________________



            Joel D. Landry on brief for appellant.
            ______________

            Sheldon Whitehouse, United States Attorney,  and Zechariah Chafee,
            __________________                               ________________

        Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.


____________________


____________________



Per  Curiam.   In this  appeal, Cesar  Roman Robles
                      ___________



            challenges  the  district court's  denial  of  his motion  to



            dismiss his  indictment for having  illegally reentered  this



            country after having been deported.  See 8 U.S.C.   1326.  We
                                                 ___



            affirm  essentially for  the  reasons given  in the  district



            court's  order, finding  Robles'  appellate  arguments to  be



            without merit.  See Loc. R. 27.1.
                            ___



                      Affirmed.
                      _________


-2-