March 31, 1995
[Not for Publication] [Not for Publication]
United States Court of Appeals United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit For the First Circuit
____________________
No. 94-2020
UNITED STATES,
Appellee,
v.
GERALDO RODRIGUEZ-RAMOS,
Defendant, Appellant,
No. 94-2021
UNITED STATES,
Appellee,
v.
BERLAY NIEVES-CRUZ
Defendant, Appellant,
No. 94-2063
UNITED STATES,
Appellee,
v.
MARIO GONZALEZ-ALVIRA,
Defendant, Appellant.
____________________
APPEALS FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO
[Hon. Jose Antonio Fuste, U.S. District Judge] ___________________
____________________
Before
Torruella, Chief Judge, ___________
Bownes, Senior Circuit Judge, ____________________
and Stahl, Circuit Judge. _____________
____________________
Gustavo A. Gelpi, Assistant Federal Public Defender, with whom _________________
Juan E. Alvarez, First Assistant Federal Public Defender and Benicio ________________ _______
Sanchez Rivera, Federal Public Defender, were on brief for appellant ______________
Rodriguez-Ramos.
Jose R. Gaztambide and Gaztambide & Plaza argued for appellant ___________________ __________________
Nieves-Cruz.
Rafael Anglada-Lopez argued for appellant Gonzalez-Alvira. ____________________
Jose A. Quiles-Espinosa, Senior Litigation Counsel, Criminal _________________________
Division, with whom Guillermo Gil, United States Attorney, was on _____________
brief for appellee.
____________________
____________________
Per Curiam. These appeals present the single Per Curiam. ___________
question of whether the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth
Amendment bars cumulative punishments for carjacking and
using a firearm in conjunction with a crime of violence, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. 2119 and 924(c), respectively.
Because the First Circuit has recently decided that
prosecution under both statutes does not violate the United
States Constitution, see United States v. Centeno-Torres, No. ___ _____________ ______________
94-1882, slip op. at 4 (1st Cir. Mar. 28, 1995), we summarily
affirm the judgment below. See 1st Cir. R. 27.1. ___
Affirmed. ________
-3- 3