
USCA1 Opinion

	




          December 21, 1994                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 94-1161                                 HENRY CASTRO POUPART,                                Petitioner, Appellant,                                          v.                           RAMON ALERS, WARDEN OF THE STATE                       PENITENTIARY AND THE LAS MALVINAS ANNEX,                                Respondent, Appellee.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO                    [Hon. Jose Antonio Fuste, U.S. District Judge]                                              ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                Torruella, Chief Judge,                                           ___________                            Selya and Cyr, Circuit Judges.                                           ______________                                 ____________________            Henry Castro Poupart on brief pro se.            ____________________            Guillermo Gil,  United States Attorney,  Jo Ann Harris,  Assistant            _____________                            _____________        Attorney General, Theresa M.B. Van Vliet, Chief, and Lena D. Mitchell,                          ______________________             ________________        Attorney,  Criminal Division,  Narcotic  and Dangerous  Drug  Section,        Department of Justice, on brief for appellee.                                 ____________________                                 ____________________                 Per  Curiam.   Pro  se petitioner  Henry Castro  Poupart                 ___________    ___  __            appeals a  district court order dismissing  his second motion            to  vacate sentence  under  28 U.S.C.    2255.    Based on  a            careful review of the entire record, and of all points raised            on  appeal, we conclude that the district court order must be            summarily affirmed.  See Local Rule 27.1.                                 ___
