September 18, 1995      [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT











                                 ____________________



        No. 93-1698



                                    UNITED STATES,



                                      Appellee,



                                          v.



                                GERALD HOYT HUMPHREY,



                                Defendant, Appellant.







                                 ____________________



                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT



                            FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE



                     [Hon. D. Brock Hornby, U.S. District Judge]
                                            ___________________



                                 ____________________



                                        Before



                                Selya, Stahl and Lynch,

                                   Circuit Judges.
                                   ______________



                                 ____________________



            Tina Schneider on brief for appellant.
            ______________

            Jay P.  McCloskey, United States  Attorney, and  F. Mark  Terison,
            _________________                                ________________

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





                                 ____________________





                                 ____________________





































                      Per  Curiam.    Gerald  Hoyt Humphrey  appeals  his
                      ___________



            sentencing  as an  armed career  criminal  under 18  U.S.C.  



            924(e), claiming  that he  did not  have the  requisite three



            convictions for crimes committed on "occasions different from



            one  another."   The  district  court  found that  Humphrey's



            crimes  of armed  robbery,  on the  one  hand, and  attempted



            murder and kidnapping,  on the other,  had been committed  on



            different occasions, so that his convictions for those crimes



            qualified   as  two  of   the  required   three  convictions.



            (Humphrey also  had a previous  conviction for manslaughter.)



            As  the district court  found, those crimes  are different in



            nature and were committed on  different days and at different



            locations.  We add  as well that they were  committed against



            different victims.  Under the circumstances, it is clear that



            the district court did  not err in sentencing Humphrey  as an



            armed  career  criminal.   Compare,  e.g.,  United States  v.
                                       ______________   _____________



            Ressler, 54 F.3d 257, 259-60  (5th Cir. 1995); United  States
            _______                                        ______________



            v. Hudspeth, 42 F.3d 1015, 1020-22 (7th Cir. 1994) (en banc),
               ________



            cert.  denied,  115  S. Ct.  2252  (1995);  United States  v.
            _____________                               _____________



            Rideout,  3 F.3d 32,  34 (2d Cir.), cert.  denied, 114 S. Ct.
            _______                             _____________



            569 (1993)  (all determining  that crimes committed  the same



            night were committed on different occasions because they were



            committed  at different times,  against different victims, at



            different locations); cf. United  States v. Gillies, 851 F.2d
                                  ___ ______________    _______



            492,  497  (1st  Cir.)  (convictions  for  robberies  of  two





































            different stores on consecutive days qualified  as two of the



            three requisite  convictions under  an earlier version  of 18



            U.S.C.   924(e)), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 857 (1988). 
                              ____________



                      Affirmed.
                      _________



























































































                                         -3-