
USCA1 Opinion

	




                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 96-2284                                     UNITED STATES,                                      Appellee,                                          v.                                     MARK WHITE,                                Defendant, Appellant.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE                   [Hon. Joseph A. DiClerico, U.S. District Judge]                                              ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                               Torruella, Chief Judge,                                          ___________                          Stahl and Lynch, Circuit Judges.                                            ______________                                 ____________________            David H. Bownes on brief for appellant.            _______________            Paul  M.  Gagnon,  United  States  Attorney,  and  Jean  B.  Weld,            ________________                                   ______________        Assistant  United States Attorney, on  Motion for Dismissal or Summary        Affirmance for appellee.                                 ____________________                                     May 12, 1997                                 ____________________                 Per Curiam.   Defendant appeals  from his conviction and                 __________            sentence  on the sole ground that the disparate penalties for            crack and powder cocaine  violate the Equal Protection Clause            of the United States Constitution.  We already have  rejected            the substance of defendant's argument.   See United States v.                                                     ___ _____________            Andrade, 94 F.3d 9,  14-15 (1st Cir. 1996); United  States v.            _______                                     ______________            Singleterry, 29  F.3d 733,  739-41 (1st Cir.),  cert. denied,            ___________                                     ____________            115 S.Ct. 647 (1994).  And we  decline defendant's suggestion            that  we should revisit and  depart from that  precedent.  We            note that the  Supreme Court has  denied certiorari in  cases            from other circuits raising the same or similar issues.  See,                                                                     ___            e.g., United States v. Teague, 93 F.3d 81, 85 (2d Cir. 1996),            ____  _____________    ______            cert. denied, 117 S.Ct. 708 (1997);  United States v. Burgos,            ____________                         _____________    ______            94   F.3d   849,  877   (4th   Cir.   1996),  cert.   denied,                                                          ______________            117 S.Ct. 1087  (1997);  United States  v.  Edwards,  98 F.3d                                     _____________      _______            1364, 1368  (D.C. Cir.  1996), cert.  denied, 1997 WL  134423                                           _____________            (April 14, 1997).                 The government's  request that  we treat its  motion for            summary disposition as  a brief  is granted;  the motion  for                                                _______            summary disposition is granted as well.                                   _______                 Affirmed.  See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.                 ________   ___                                         -2-
