January 8, 1993       [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]



                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT




                              _________________________

          No. 92-2112

                              UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                      Appellee,

                                          v.

                             BEATRIZ JUNQUERA DE RIVERA,

                                Defendant, Appellant.

                              _________________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                              FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

                     [Hon. Morton A. Brody, U.S. District Judge]
                                            ___________________

                              _________________________

                                        Before

                             Torruella, Selya and Stahl, 

                                   Circuit Judges.
                                   ______________

                              _________________________

               J. Hilary Billings for appellant.
               __________________
               Margaret  D. McGaughey,  Assistant  United States  Attorney,
               ______________________
          with  whom Richard S. Cohen,  United States Attorney,  and Jay P.
                     ________________                                ______
          McCloskey, Assistant  United States Attorney, were  on brief, for
          _________
          the United States.

                              _________________________



                              _________________________















                    Per Curiam.  This is a guideline sentencing appeal.  We
                    __________

          have  carefully  reviewed  the   appellant's  objections  to  the

          district court's determination of her offense level and guideline

          sentencing range (which, in  turn, led to her sentence).   Having

          in mind, particularly, that a  criminal defendant must carry  the

          burden of  proving her entitlement to downward adjustments in the

          presumptively applicable  offense level, see, e.g., United States
                                                   ___  ____  _____________

          v.  Ocasio,  914 F.2d  330,  332  (1st  Cir.  1990), and  that  a
              ______

          deferential   standard    of   review   applies    to   factbound

          determinations under the sentencing guidelines, see, e.g., United
                                                          ___  ____  ______

          States v. Ruiz, 905  F.2d 499, 508 (1st Cir. 1990)  (holding that
          ______    ____

          "where   there  is   more   than  one   plausible  view   of  the

          circumstances,  the sentencing  court's choice  among supportable

          alternatives cannot be clearly erroneous"), we see no sound basis

          for overturning the lower court's findings.  

                    We  need go  no  further.   We  have said  before  that

          "[s]entencing appeals prosecuted .  . . in the tenuous  hope that

          lightning  may strike  ought not  to be  dignified with  exegetic

          opinions, intricate factual synthesis, or full-dress explications

          of accepted legal principles."  United States v. Ruiz-Garcia, 886
                                          _____________    ___________

          F.2d 474, 477 (1st Cir. 1989).  So it is here.





                    The judgment of conviction and the sentence imposed are
                    The judgment of conviction and the sentence imposed are
                    _______________________________________________________

          affirmed.   See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.
          affirmed.   See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.
          _________   ___




                                          2