U.S. v. Camilo, 94-1099

• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
• Writing for the Court: Before Torruella, Selya, and Cyr; Per Curiam
• Citation: U.S. v. Camilo, 30 F.3d 126 (1st Cir. 1994)
• Decision Date: 08 August 1994
• Docket Number: No. 94-1099,94-1099
• Parties: NOTICE: First Circuit Local Rule 36.2(b)6 states unpublished opinions may be cited only in related cases. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Blas CAMILO, Defendant, Appellant.

Page 126

30 F.3d 126

NOTICE: First Circuit Local Rule 36.2(b)6 states unpublished opinions may be cited only in related cases.

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Blas CAMILO, Defendant, Appellant.

No. 94-1099

United States Court of Appeals First Circuit.

August 8, 1994

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire [Hon. Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr., U.S. District Judge ]

Jean B. Weld, Assistant United States Attorney, with whom Paul M. Gagnon, United States Attorney, was on brief, for the United States.

D.N.H.

AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART AND REMANDED.

Before Torruella, Selya, and Cyr, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam.

We have carefully reviewed the record on appeal and discern no breach by the government of the plea agreement between it and the defendant. We likewise find no hint that the district court violated the representations it made to the defendant at the change-of-plea hearing. Consequently, there is no cognizable basis for defendant's request that he be permitted to withdraw his guilty plea.

Defendant's remaining assignments of error pertain to the imposition of sentence. The situation in this respect is clouded by two recent developments. For one thing, the Probation Office's policy in connection with a matter material to the computation of drug quantity for purposes of imposing mandatory minimum sentences has changed significantly. For another thing, the Second Circuit decided United States v. Darmand, 3 F.3d 1578, 1581 (2d Cir. 1993) (holding that "[u]nlike the [Sentencing] Guidelines, which require a sentencing court to consider similar conduct in setting a sentence, the statutory mandatory minimum sentences of 21 U.S.C. Sec. 841(b)(1) apply only to the conduct which actually result[s] in a conviction under that statute"). If this case...