
USCA1 Opinion

	




          June 5, 1996                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 95-2340                                    UNITED STATES,                                      Appellee,                                          v.                                    JOSEPH HEARN,                                Defendant, Appellant.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE                   [Hon. Steven J. McAuliffe, U.S. District Judge]                                              ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                Torruella, Chief Judge,                                           ___________                          Boudin and Lynch, Circuit Judges.                                            ______________                                 ____________________            Jonathan R.  Saxe and  Twomey &  Sisti  Law Offices  on brief  for            _________________      ____________________________        appellant.            Paul  M.  Gagnon,  United  States  Attorney,  and  Jean  B.  Weld,            ________________                                   ______________        Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.                                 ____________________                                 ____________________                      Per  Curiam.      Defendant  pled  guilty  and  was                      ___________            sentenced to  a 188-month term of  imprisonment for violation            of 21 U.S.C.    841(a)(1), 846.  On appeal he argues that the            court erred  in rejecting his argument  of "sentencing factor            manipulation" and refusing to exclude from the calculation of            his sentence certain quantities of  "crack" cocaine.  After a            careful review of the parties' briefs, the hearing transcript            and other parts of  the record, we  find no "clear error"  in            the district court's  determination that defendant failed  to            sustain  his   burden  of  proving  entitlement   to  such  a            reduction.  There was  no proof of extraordinary governmental            misconduct.  See United States v.  Montoya, 62 F.3d 1, 4 (1st                         ___ _____________     _______            Cir. 1995).                      As no substantial question is presented for appeal,            the judgment below is affirmed.  See Loc. R. 27.1.                                  ________   ___                                         -3-
