[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]



                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT







                                 ____________________





        No. 97-1147



                                    UNITED STATES,



                                      Appellee,



                                          v.



                                   DIANE C. EVANS,



                                Defendant, Appellant.





                                 ____________________



                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT



                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE



                   [Hon. Joseph A. DiClerico, U.S. District Judge]
                                              ___________________



                                 ____________________



                                        Before



                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________

                           Stahl and Lynch, Circuit Judges.
                                            ______________



                                 ____________________



            Richard N. Foley on brief for appellant.
            ________________

            Paul  M.  Gagnon,  United  States  Attorney,  and  Jean  B.  Weld,
            ________________                                   ______________

        Assistant U.S. Attorney, on brief for appellee.





                                 ____________________



                                     MAY 8, 1997

                                 ____________________

































                 Per Curiam.   Upon  careful consideration of  the briefs
                 __________



            and  record, we conclude  that defendant's  sentence properly



            was  enhanced for abuse of a position of trust under U.S.S.G.



              3B1.3.  



                 We agree with the district court's interpretation of the



            guideline   terms,  and  we  find  no   clear  error  in  its



            application of those terms  to the facts  of this case.   See
                                                                      ___



            United  States v.  Tardiff, 969  F.2d  1283,  1289 (1st  Cir.
            ______________     _______



            1992).    The enhancement  was fully supported  by a  showing



            that defendant's  position "provided the freedom  to commit a



            difficult-to-detect  wrong."   See  id.   The district  court
                                           ___  __



            outlined  the  elements  of defendant's  position  of private



            trust with her employer,  her actual use of that  position to



            commit and  conceal her  thefts, and  the significant  way in



            which that position contributed to  the misconduct, including



            her primary and "managerial" responsibility for  two accounts



            and her transfers between those accounts to cover her thefts.



            See U.S.S.G.    3B1.3, application  note 1; United  States v.
            ___                                         ______________



            Santiago-Gonzalez, 66 F.3d 3, 8 (1st Cir. 1995).
            _________________



                 Affirmed.  See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.
                 ________   ___



























                                         -2-