USCA1 Opinion

United States Court of Appeals

United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit
For the First Circuit
____________________
No. 92-2006
UNITED STATES,
Appellee,
v.
CHARLES E. DANIELS,
Defendant, Appellant.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Hon. Frank H. Freedman, Senior U.S. District Judge]
__________________________
____________________
Before
Cyr and Stahl, Circuit Judges,
______________
and Fuste,* District Judge.
______________
____________________
Robert J. Carnes, by appointment of the Court, for appellant.
________________

C. Jeffrey Kinder, Assistant United States Attorney, with whom

_________________
John Pappalardo, United States Attorney, was on brief for appellee.
_______________
____________________
August 30, 1993
____________________
________________
*Of the District of Puerto Rico, sitting by designation.

STAHL,
defendant

Circuit Judge.
______________

A federal

Charles Daniels ("Daniels")

jury convicted

of illegal possession

of a firearm by a convicted felon, a violation of 18 U.S.C.

922(g)(1).

The district court sentenced

years imprisonment,
Armed Career

the mandatory minimum sentence under the

Criminal Act

("ACCA"), 18 U.S.C.

On appeal, Daniels

claims that:

him

been

should

government's

have

Daniels to fifteen

violation

1) the indictment

dismissed
of

the

924(e)(1).

as

Interstate

Detainers ("IAD"); 2) his trial counsel was

result

against
of

Agreement

the
on

constitutionally

ineffective;

3)

the

district

court

failed

to

properly

instruct the jury on the government's burden of proof; and 4)

the district

court improperly sentenced him

under the ACCA.

Finding these claims meritless, we affirm.

I.
I.
__
Factual Background and Prior Proceedings
Factual Background and Prior Proceedings
________________________________________
We recount the facts in the light most favorable to
the prosecution.
(1st

United States v. Alvarez, 987 F.2d

______________
_______

Cir. 1993), petition for

________ ___

(U.S.

June

9,

investigation

1993)

(No.

of Daniels

77, 79

cert. filed,
U.S.L.W.
_____ _____ ____
__
92-9080).

and his

Massachusetts

girlfriend, Deborah

Hill

("Hill"), culminated on November 17, 1989, with the execution

of

search

warrants

warrants at
authorized

their
a

respective

search

-22

for

residences.
cocaine,

The

cocaine

paraphernalia, and

records related to the

purchase and sale

of cocaine.
Prior to
had

been observed

nylon bag.
with the

the search of
leaving

his apartment

bag.

At

approximately 7 p.m.,

execute the warrant.

the apartment
portions

McDonald,

Daniels

carrying a

brown

He drove to Hill's residence and entered her home

State Troopers forcibly entered

other

Hill's residence,

Three

by way of
of

Hill's residence in order to

of the troopers, having

its kitchen, moved

the

reached the

five Massachusetts

apartment.
entrance

As

to a

entered

forward towards

one

trooper,

bedroom, he

Lt.

observed

Daniels, in the middle of the room, "crouched" over the brown

bag with
and

his hand inside it.

As Daniels looked up, McDonald

two other troopers rushed toward him and pushed him onto

a bed.

Following a struggle, the troopers handcuffed Daniels

and removed him from the scene.

While the
Trooper

Thomas

three

Kerle's

troopers were
cursory

revealed cocaine and cocaine

search of the
the

room,

subduing

search of

paraphernalia.

the

loaded

Browning

brown

bag

A more complete

bag, performed after Daniels was

yielded

Daniels,

.38

automatic pistol and approximately $1,000 cash.

removed from
caliber

semi-

A subsequent

execution of the warrant to search Daniels's residence netted

17

rounds

of

.38

caliber ammunition

which

removed from the gun found in the brown bag.

matched

that

-33

Daniels pled guilty

to cocaine related charges

Hampshire County (Mass.) Superior

three to

six years imprisonment.

in

Court and was sentenced to

On March 5, 1992,

he was

indicted by a federal grand jury on a charge of possession of

a firearm by a convicted felon,

in violation of 18 U.S.C.

922(g)(1).
At trial,
the case, as well
testified that

the various

she assisted

Daniels in the

of cocaine related

the

debts.

and that she

the gun before the police showed it to her.

that

distribution of
She

also

Finally, she testified that the contents

bag belonged to Daniels

that he and

Hill

that the brown bag was one that she had previously

bought for Daniels.

of the

involved in

as both Hill and Daniels, testified.

cocaine and collection

testified

state troopers

Hill used and

brown

nylon

paraphernalia were his.

reaching into the bag
also claimed that he

sold cocaine.
bag,
He

the

had never seen

Daniels admitted

He also

seized

denied, however,

admitted

cocaine
that he

at the time McDonald sighted

and
was

him, and

had never before seen the gun at issue.

The jury deliberated approximately two hours before returning

a guilty verdict.
II.
II.
___
Discussion
Discussion
__________
A. Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
A. Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
_____________________________________

-44

Daniels argues that his trial counsel's performance

was

constitutionally

motion

to

suppress evidence

Hill's apartment;
drug

infirm because:

and 2)

activity, thereby

seized

she withdrew

the search

of

during

she cross-examined Hill

"opening the

evidence

regarding

however,

need not address these

properly before us.

1)

Daniels's

door" to

own drug

about her

admission of

involvement.

We,

claims because they are not

A brief explanation follows.

It

is well settled in this circuit that a claim of

ineffective assistance of counsel

direct

will not be resolved

on a

appeal where the claim was not raised in the district

court, unless the

sufficiently

developed

Georgacarakos,
_____________
Instead,

988

such a

proceeding under
appellant

record

F.2d

claim

are not in
exists.

1289,
is to

28 U.S.C.

does not argue

Moreover, our
Daniels's

critical facts

dispute and

United States
______________

1297-98

(1st

be

pursued in

2255.

Id.
___

that he

at

raised this

Cir.
a

a
v.

1993).

collateral

1298.

Here,

issue below.

review of the record demonstrates that both of

claims

are

heavily

circumstances surrounding

each

actions taken by trial counsel.

dependent
of the

on

the

allegedly

factual
deficient

Accordingly, we do not reach

Daniels's ineffective assistance of counsel claim.

B. Interstate Agreement on Detainers
B. Interstate Agreement on Detainers
_____________________________________
Daniels next argues that the indictment should have
been dismissed because

his rights under

-55

the IAD, 18

U.S.C.

app. II,

2, art.

transferred

IV(e)1, were violated when

from

Massachusetts

purposes of arraignment.

in

custody

for

his federal indictment, Daniels was

Gardner,

Massachusetts

("Gardner"), serving his sentence

On March 6, 1992,

federal

We disagree.

At the time of
incarcerated

to

he was twice

facility

on the state drug charges.

the day after his federal

indictment, the

district court, sua sponte, issued a writ of habeas corpus ad

___ ______
______ ______ __
prosequendum to
____________

the

warden at

Gardner, ordering

production on March 20, 1992, for

indictment.

On March

arraignment on the federal

9, 1992, the

Service lodged a detainer

Daniels's

United States Marshal's

with the Gardner warden, notifying

him of the pending federal charges against Daniels.

Daniels made his initial appearance before a United
States

Magistrate Judge

advised of

1992, so

returned

March 20,

the charge against him,

appointed counsel.
30,

on

to

The

meanwhile, issued a second

After

could be
same

being

Daniels requested court-

arraignment was continued

that counsel
Gardner that

1992.

day.

present.
The

to March

Daniels was

district court,

writ, ordering the Gardner warden

to produce Daniels on March 30, 1992.

____________________
1. Pursuant to Article IV(e) of the IAD, "[i]f trial is not
had on any indictment . . . contemplated hereby prior to the

prisoner's being
returned
to the
original place
of
imprisonment . . . such indictment . . . shall not be of any
further force or effect, and the court shall enter an order
dismissing the same with prejudice."
-66

Daniels appeared for arraignment on March 30, 1992,

with appointed counsel,
discovery
returned

and

motion

to Gardner,

and entered
schedule
where

a not guilty

was set,

he remained

and

plea.

Daniels

until his

A
was

federal

trial.
Daniels's
literal
argument
have

reading of

argument for
Article IV(e).

is not without merit.

firmly held

application."

that

United States
_____________

held--as have

interruption

in state

is

Strictly

based on

speaking, the

In this circuit, however, we

"common sense

(1st Cir.), cert. denied,

_____ ______
we have

dismissal

rejects that

v. Taylor, 947 F.2d

______

literal

1002, 1003

112 S. Ct. 2982 (1992).

Instead,

several other circuits--that

a brief

prison

arraignment, where the prisoner

confinement

for purposes

of

is returned to state custody

the same day, does not violate the IAD. Id.; United States v.
___ _____________

Taylor, 861 F.2d 316, 319 (1st Cir. 1988); see also Baxter v.
______
___ ____ ______
United States, 966 F.2d
______________
from

state custody

does not violate

1167, 1171

387, 389

for few

IAD); United States v.

______________

(9th Cir.)

1992) (removal

hours for arraignment

and plea

Johnson, 953
_______

(five different transfers

custody to federal court did

113 S.

(8th Cir.

F.2d

from state

not violate IAD), cert. denied,

_____ ______

Ct. 226 (1992); United States v. Roy, 830

______________
___

636 (7th Cir. 1987) (overnight

F.2d 628,

removal did not violate IAD),

cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1068 (1988); United States v. Roy, 771
_____ ______
_____________
___
F.2d 54, 60

(2d Cir.

1985) (same), cert.

_____

denied, 475
______

U.S.

-77

1110 (1986).
215

(10th

however

But see United States v. Schrum,

___ ___ _____________
______
Cir.

briefly,

1981)
IAD

(whenever
is

prisoner is

violated

and

638 F.2d 214,

transferred,

charges

must

be

dismissed), aff'g
_____
States
______

504 F.

v. Thompson,
________

Supp.

562 F.2d

23 (D.
232, 234

Kan. 1980);
(3d Cir.

United
______

1977) (en

banc) (same), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 949 (1978).

_____ ______
The rationale behind our

interpretation of the IAD

is that a brief interruption in state custody poses no threat

to the prisoner's rehabilitation efforts, the main purpose of
the

Act.

436 U.S.

Taylor, 947
______

F.2d at 1003;

340, 349 (1978).

Indeed,

interruptions may be advantageous

Taylor,
______

947

F.2d

at 1003

Here, Daniels has alleged

efforts of his state

United States v Mauro,

_____________
_____
as we have

noted, such

to a defendant. See, e.g.,

___ ____

(securing

speedy

arraignment).

no hindrance to the rehabilitative

incarceration.2

Finally, Daniels tries

to distinguish both Taylor cases because they involved single

______
transfers, while Daniels was twice transferred.
distinction to be of
here, the
right

no legal moment, especially, where,

second transfer

to counsel.

We find this

was effected to

Accordingly,

we reject

as

secure Daniels's
Daniels's claim

under the IAD.

____________________
2. In fact, as the government correctly points out, literal
application of the IAD could frustrate its goals.
If we
accept Daniels's argument for purposes of this case, he would
have been removed from state custody from the original date
of his federal arraignment, March 20, 1992, until the date of
his disposition, August 3, 1992.
We can hardly think of a
greater disruption in rehabilitative services.

-88

C. Sentencing Under the ACCA

C. Sentencing Under the ACCA
_____________________________
Pursuant
possessing

To

the

firearm must

fifteen years if
felonies or

to

ACCA,
receive

he has three prior

serious drug offenses.

support the

ACCA

sentence

introduced into evidence at the

copies of

Daniels's

felon
a

of

minimum sentence

of

convictions for violent

18 U.S.C.

924(e)(1).

enhancement, the

government

sentencing hearing certified

convictions for

1965, attempted robbery in

convicted

attempted

1970, rape in 1973,

assault

in

and reckless

endangerment and assault in 1986.

At the sentencing hearing,

Daniels

rape

argued

endangerment

that

the

1973

and

1986

reckless

and assault convictions were invalid predicates

because he was not represented by counsel during the relevant

proceedings.
On

appeal, Daniels embarks

He now argues that

too

old to be

on a different course.

the 1965, 1970, and 1973

used as predicate

offenses.3

convictions are
This

claim is

meritless.
Not only does the ACCA lack a limitations period on
predicate

crimes,

but

appellate

courts

have

uniformly

____________________
3. In his brief, appellant also argued that the district
court improperly used as a predicate Daniels's underlying
drug conviction and also improperly considered his 1986
convictions for assault and reckless endangerment as separate
predicate offenses. These contentions, however, were waived
at oral argument.
-99

rejected attempts to
States
______

v.

create such a

Alvarez, 972
_______

(predicate convictions

F.2d

1000,

limitation.
1006

more than fifteen

See
___

United
______

(9th Cir.

1992)

years old),

cert.
_____

denied, 113 S. Ct. 1427 (1993); United States v. Blankenship,

______
_____________
___________
923 F.2d

1110, 1118

(5th Cir.) (predicate

convictions more

than twenty years old), cert. denied, 111 S. Ct. 2262 (1991);
_____ ______
United States v. McConnell, 916 F.2d 448, 450 (8th Cir. 1990)
_____________
_________

(same);

United States v. Preston,

_____________
_______

910 F.2d 81,

89 (3d Cir.

1990), cert. denied, 111 S. Ct. 1002 (1991); United States v.

_____ ______
_____________
Green,
_____

904

F.2d

654, 655

similarly decline

(11th

Daniels's

limitations period,

Cir.

invitation

and find that he

1990)
to

(same).

create

We

such

was properly sentenced

pursuant to the ACCA.

D. Jury Instructions
D. Jury Instructions
_____________________
Daniels's final claim
failed adequately

to instruct

government's burden of proof.

instruction
error.
S.
only

is that

was made

at

the district

and define

court

for the jury

the

As no objection to the court's

trial, we

Fed. R. Crim. P. 52(b);

review

only for

plain

United States v. Olano, 113

_____________
_____

Ct. 1770, 1778 (1993) (reversal for plain error warranted

where

the

error

"seriously

affects

the

fairness,

integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings").

We

have read the charge and find no plain error.4

____________________
4. Indeed,
appellant's
counsel
termed
this
claim
"insupportable," and filed the relevant section of the brief
pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).
______
__________
-1010

Based

on the foregoing, appellant's conviction and

sentence are affirmed.

affirmed.
_________

-1111