Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Toro-Aristizabal v. United States, 1st Cir. (1994)
Toro-Aristizabal v. United States, 1st Cir. (1994)
Toro-Aristizabal v. United States, 1st Cir. (1994)
______________________
A. John Pappalardo, United States Attorney, and Stephen
____________________
________
Heymann, Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.
_______
____________________
____________________
Per Curiam.
__________
charged,
in
possess
with
quantity of
violation
intent
a multi-count
intent
U.S.C.
violation of
separate
distribute
846
of
conspiracy to
distribution
of a
1988, in
1), possession
with
with
in August
841(a)(1) (count
possession
July 1987.
after
with
and
(count
21 U.S.C.
cocaine (counts 4
violations
Toro-Aristizabal was
distribution of cocaine
incidents
indictment,
to distribute
to distribute and
1986, in
eleven
Appellant Jaime
3) and
intent
to
the period
jury trial.
We
affirmed
his
F.2d
cert. denied,
____________
722, 739
(1st
Cir.),
112
S. Ct.
605
appellant
raises
his
(1991).
In
this
2255
motion,
He
also,
in
other
to the
pleadings
filed
following issues:
in
the
(1)
the
of
effective
date of the
incorrectly sentenced
included
U.S.C.
construing
a term
846
of supervised
and
contrary
ambiguous
a term
of imprisonment
release in
to the
statutes;
sentencing court
policy
and
(3)
violation
of
he
which
of 21
lenity
in
received
an
attorney
was
appointed
to
represent appellant.
denied the
reviewed
petition.
This
judgment of
the district
essentially
the
appeal ensued.
court as to
reasons stated
the $20,000
in the
have
fine for
court's memorandum,
3622(a),
which applied to
for appellant's
received a
first note
and 4 to
14.
On Count
this
release
conspiracies.
of
846.
of parole
imprisonment;
supervised
term
assertion that
or supervised
should not
release, we
is relevant only to
1, he was
sentence
he
did
or parole.
sentenced to
not
___
include
Second,
846
counts 3
a term
of
term
of
applies to
any event,
the sentences
imposed on
these
3 --
the August
years imprisonment.
In
1986 conviction
for
August 1986,
841(b)(1)(B)
-3-
."
Thus, the
the sentence
counts
to
sentenced
concurrent
appellant
terms
on
of
the
remaining
imprisonment
of
supervised
November
release.
13, 1986
Anti-Drug Abuse
to July 15,
Act of
replaced "special
Act of
(1991), the
Section 1002
with a
of the
October 27,
"term of
supervised
Supreme
deferred the
of special
Gozlon-Peretz v.
_____________
Court
1986,
of 21
Congress had
the elimination
In
the period
1984, however,
1987.
covered
1987.
date for
395
counts
1986, enacted on
parole term"
These
effective
parole to November
United States,
_____________
held
that
the
1,
498 U.S.
supervised
dates
appellant
was correctly
to 14
fall
sentenced
in
to
Id. at 410.
___
Because
this time
period,
terms of
supervised
release.
Because appellant's sentences were legal, his claim
of ineffective assistance of counsel fails.
that the
court
erred in
calculating
his sentence
on
the
predating
the
-4-
conspiracy
count
effective
date
by
conduct
already
See 940
___
2255 motion
the
to
we
F.2d at 740.
of
referring
sentencing guidelines,
legal issues,
we reject
appellant's
-5-