
USCA1 Opinion

	




                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 96-1920                                    UNITED STATES,                                      Appellee,                                          v.                                    YUSUF TORRES,                                Defendant, Appellant.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE                    [Hon. Paul J. Barbadoro, U.S. District Judge]                                             ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                 Selya, Circuit Judge,                                        _____________                              Cyr, Senior Circuit Judge,                                   ____________________                              and Lynch, Circuit Judge.                                         _____________                                 ____________________            Janet H. Pumphrey on brief for appellant.            _________________            Paul  M.  Gagnon,  United  States  Attorney,  and  Jean  B.  Weld,            ________________                                   ______________        Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.                                 ____________________                                  February 12, 1997                                 ____________________                 Per Curiam.   Defendant appeals from his sentence on the                 __________            sole  ground that  the district  court  erred "in  failing to            consider a downward departure  under U.S.S.G.   5K2.0 because            the 100-to-1  penalty for  crack and powder  cocaine violates            the equal  protection clause."  He  specifically argues that,            when   Congress   disapproved  the   Sentencing  Commission's            proposal  to  equalize  those penalties,  it  violated  equal            protection.  However, we  already have rejected the substance            of that 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).                                     ____________            Defendant presents no discernible reason to diverge from that            precedent.                 The sentence is affirmed.  See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.                                 ________   ___                                         -2-
