US v. Fusco
Case Date: 12/01/1997
Court: United States Court of Appeals
Docket No: 97-1505
|
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION] UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT ____________________ No. 97-1505 UNITED STATES, Appellee, v. JOHN A. FUSCO, Defendant, Appellant. ____________________ APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND [Hon. Mary M. Lisi, U.S. District Judge] ___________________ ____________________ Before Torruella, Chief Judge, ___________ Selya and Stahl, Circuit Judges. ______________ ____________________ Randy Olsen on brief for appellant. ___________ Sheldon Whitehouse, United States Attorney, Margaret E. Curran ___________________ ___________________ and Charles A. Tamuleviz, Assistant United States Attorneys, on brief ____________________ for appellee. ____________________ December 1, 1997 ____________________ Per Curiam. Upon careful review, we reject appellant's ___________ contention that, in sentencing him on revocation of probation, the district court was bound by a downward departure granted during appellant's original sentencing. The plain language of the applicable statute, 18 U.S.C. 3565(a)(2), does not support that contention. See United ___ ______ States v. Plunkett, 94 F.3d 517, 519 (9th Cir. 1996); United ______ ________ ______ States v. Redmond, 69 F.3d 979, 981-82 (9th Cir. 1995). ______ _______ Appellant's reliance on United States v. Granderson, 511 U.S. _____________ __________ 39, 57 n.15 (1994), is misplaced. See United States v. Byrd, ___ _____________ ____ 116 F.3d 770, 774 (5th Cir. 1997). Affirmed. See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1. ________ ___ -2- |