USCA1 Opinion

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 93-1471
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Appellee,
v.
JOSE PARA,
Defendant, Appellant.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
[Hon. Francis J. Boyle, U.S. District Judge]
___________________
____________________
Before
Cyr, Circuit Judge,
_____________
Bownes, Senior Circuit Judge,
____________________
and Stahl, Circuit Judge.
_____________
____________________

Damon M. D'Ambrosio and Martin D. Harris, Esquire, Ltd. on br

___________________
________________________________
for appellant.
Edwin J. Gale, United States Attorney, Margaret E. Curr
______________
__________________
Assistant United States Attorney, and Gerard B. Sullivan, Assist
___________________
United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.
____________________
November 8, 1993
____________________

Per Curiam.
Per Curiam
__________
three-year
release

Appellant

prison term

and

on December 1, 1987,

Jose Para

three-year

of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C.

C), on

or about

May 6, 1989,

prison term, the

release on
vised

1987 ("first

after Para had

term

of

to a

supervised

for distributing four and one-half

ounces

May 6,

was sentenced

841(a)(1),(b)(1)(-

offense").

On or

about

served two years of

the three-year

United States Parole Commission

authorized his

parole.

On

release, Para was

February 2, 1992, while still

arrested for distributing

amount of heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C.

on super-

a detectable

841(a)(1),(b)(1)(C)

("second offense").

In 1993, Para was convicted and sentenced to

a sixteen-month prison term for

violation hearing

the second offense.

before the district

Following a

court in the wake

of the

second offense, Para was sentenced to a consecutive sixteen-month

prison term for violating the supervised

release term imposed in

connection with the first offense.

We summarily
plain

language of the

reject Para's mischaracterization

December 1, 1987, judgment

and sentence, as imposing a

term of

following
that, in

supervised

release

Para's release from

The judgment
for a
prison.

period

explicitly imposed
of three

Undaunted,

years"

Para insists

fact, he must have been sentenced to a "special parole"

term, because he was paroled

sion.

of conviction

term of "special parole" rather than

a term of "supervised release."

"a

of the

"Special

Sentencing

States, 498
______

by the United States Parole Commis-

parole," prior

Reform Act

of 1984

to

its elimination

(SRA),

under

Gozlon-Peretz v.
_____________

the

United
______

U.S. 395, 397 (1991), was a mandatory element in any

__ ___

prison sentence imposed for a federal

______ ________

drug offense.

The form of

parole on which
is merely a
Commission

Para was released from prison

in 1989, however,

post-sentencing administrative ruling by

that the defendant

into the community prior

imprisonment imposed by

should be

the Parole

conditionally released

to the completion

of the full term

the sentencing court.

See
___

of

Morrissey v.
_________

Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 477 (1972).

______

Para's alternate claim is that the sixteen-month prison

term the district court imposed in 1993 for committing the second
offense while on
punishment.

supervised release is an invalid

See Hammond v. United

___ _______
______

Cir. 1986).

a lawful

stated,

8, 16 (1st

the date of the

term of supervised release

have been imposed, no matter

sentence

States, 786 F.2d

______

Para reasons that in May of 1987

first offense

ex post facto
__ ____ _____

could not

what the judgment of conviction and

because the

SRA

did

not

take effect

until

November 1, 1987, well after the commission of the first offense.

This claim is
that,

"in the

interim

foreclosed by Gozlon-Peretz, which

_____________
period

between

October 27,

held

1986,

and

November 1, 1987, supervised release applies for all drug offenses in the
the

Anti Drug Abuse

3207].
1002

Act of 1986,

498 U.S. at 409.

841(a)(1),(b)(1)(C))
its

enactment on

1002"

[Section 1002 of

Pub. L. No.

99-570, 100 Stat

Since the first offense was for an ADAA

violation (distribution

U.S.C.
upon

categories specified by ADAA

of cocaine
and ADAA

October

27,

in

violation of

1002 became
1986, the

21

effective

district

court

correctly
release

sentenced Para
on December 1,

to

1987, see
___

mandatory
21

term

U.S.C.

of

supervised

841(a)(1),

(b)-

(1)(C).
The district court judgment is summarily affirmed.
_________________________________________________
Loc. R. 27.1.
____________

See
___