United States v. Shaw

Opinion

USCA1 Opinion

        October 9, 1992         [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

____________________

No. 92-1718

                                    UNITED STATES,

                                      Appellee,

                                          v.

                                    RICHARD SHAW,

                                Defendant, Appellant.

____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

                 [Hon. Andrew A. Caffrey, Senior U.S. District Judge]
                                          __________________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                 Breyer, Chief Judge,
                                         ___________
                         Torruella and Selya, Circuit Judges.
                                              ______________

                                 ____________________

            Richard A. Shaw, on brief pro se.
            _______________
            A. John Pappalardo, United States  Attorney, and Tobin  N. Harvey,
            __________________                               ________________
        Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.

____________________

____________________

Per Curiam.  The  terms of this court's  remand did
                      __________

            not call  for  an evidentiary  hearing,  but rather  for  the

            sentencing judge simply  to review the matter  and state what

            his original  sentencing intention  was.   Consequently,  the

            sentencing  judge  did  not  err   in  refusing  to  hold  an

            evidentiary  hearing,  to  appoint   counsel,  or  to  recuse

            himself.

                      Affirmed.
                      ________

-2-