
USCA1 Opinion

	




                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________                 No. 94-1092                                     SAFU BOATENG,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                          v.                              UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                                 Defendant, Appellee.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS                 [Hon. A. David Mazzone, Senior U.S. District Judge]                                         __________________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                               Torruella, Selya and Cyr,                                   Circuit Judges.                                   ______________                                 ____________________            Safu Boateng pro se on Memorandum in support of appeal brief.            ____________            Donald K. Stern, United  States Attorney, and  Michael J.  Pelgro,            _______________                                __________________        Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.                                 ____________________                                    July 22, 1994                                 ____________________                      Per Curiam.  We affirm the dismissal of appellant's                      __________              2255  petition essentially  for the  reasons stated  by the            district court.    Because appellant  received the  mandatory            minimum  sentence, he was not prejudiced by counsel's failure            to argue for  a lower sentence.  United  States v. Sepulveda,                                             ___________________________            15  F.3d 1161,  1201-02 (1st  Cir.  1993) (because  defendant            received  the  mandatory  minimum  sentence,  a  role-in-the-            offense reduction  would have had  no effect on  the sentence            and  consequently  court  refused to  decide  whether  or not            appellant was a  minor participant), cert. denied,  1994 U.S.                                                 ____  ______            Lexis 4738 (1994).                      Affirmed.                      ________
