USCA1 Opinion

March 9, 1993
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 92-2174
UNITED STATES,
Appellee,
v.
VICTOR GONZALEZ,
Defendant, Appellant.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
[Hon. Raymond J. Pettine, Senior U.S. District Judge]
__________________________
____________________
Before
Breyer, Chief Judge,
___________
Torruella and Cyr, Circuit Judges.
______________
____________________

Victor Gonzalez on brief pro se.

_______________
Lincoln C. Almond, United States Attorney, Margaret E. Curran
_________________
___________________
Kenneth P. Madden, Assistant United States Attorneys, on brief
__________________
appellee.
____________________
____________________

Per Curiam.
___________

Contrary to
penalties

appellant's contention,

increased

maximum

and

provisions

of the Anti-Drug Abuse

the

supervised

Act of 1986,

the

release

Pub. L. No.

99-570, 100 Stat. 3207 (ADAA) became effective on the date of

the ADAA's enactment, i.e., October 27, 1986.
v.

United States,
______________

provisions
well.

of the

ADAA

U.S. 395

(1991).

became effective

The
on that

no-parole
date, as

United States v. De Los Santos-Himitola, 924 F.2d 380,

_____________
______________________

381 (1st Cir. 1991).

U.S.C.

498

Gozlon-Peretz
_____________

And, although Gozlon-Peretz involved 21

_____________

841 (controlled

rationale applies equally

substances), we have held that

to the parallel

provisions in

its
21

U.S.C.
31,

960.

33-34

Padilla Palacios v. United States, 932 F.2d

_________________
______________

(1st

Cir.

violations of both
April 1987.

1991).

21 U.S.C.

His sentences

The

appellant

841 and 21
of 25 years

committed

U.S.C.

960

in

of imprisonment

on

each of the four

counts, to be served concurrently,

sentences of

years

20

of supervised

release

on

and his
the

two

substantive counts, to be served concurrently, are lawful and

his arguments

to the contrary

are foreclosed by

the above-

cited precedent.
Appellant appears
penalty

provisions

coordinate

of

also to argue that

21

U.S.C.

conspiracy provisions),

1988, were unlawfully applied to him.

separate argument,
post-conviction
defendants.
1088, slip op.

it

here

however, we have

appeal brought

United States v.
______________

by

846

for the

and

enacted on
Even

one of

(the

if intended as a
a prior

appellant's

Sigifredo Gonzalez,
__________________

reasons

963

November 18,

rejected it in

at 3-6 (1st Cir. Sept. 11,

as well

amendments to the

1990).

stated in

co-

No. 90We reject

that Gonzalez

________
opinion.
The

order

of the

district

conviction motion is affirmed.

Affirmed.
_________

-3-

court

denying this

post-