
USCA1 Opinion

	




                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 97-1366                                    UNITED STATES,                                      Appellee,                                          v.                      PASQUALE MUNAFO, A/K/A PAT, A/K/A FAT PAT,                                Defendant, Appellant.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS                   [Hon. Reginald C. Lindsay, U.S. District Judge]                                              ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                Torruella, Chief Judge,                                           ___________                           Stahl and Lynch, Circuit Judges.                                            ______________                                 ____________________            John Wall on brief for appellant.            _________            Donald K. Stern, United  States Attorney, James  C. Rehnquist  and            _______________                           ___________________        Ernest S.  Dinisco, Assistant  United States  Attorneys, on  brief for        __________________        appellee.                                 ____________________                                   October 14, 1997                                 ____________________                 Per Curiam.   Upon careful review, we perceive  no clear                 __________            error in the district court's  determination of the amount of            loss.    Further,  no improper  double  counting  occurred in            adjusting appellant's  sentence both for  his managerial role            in the offense under U.S.S.G.    3B1.1(b), as well as for his            business  of receiving  and  selling  stolen  property  under            U.S.S.G.   2B1.1(b)(4)(B).  See  United States v. Reeves,  83                                        ___  _____________    ______            F.3d 203, 208 (8th Cir. 1996).                 Affirmed.  See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.                 ________   ___                                         -2-
