June 21, 1993         [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            United States Court of Appeals
                                For the First Circuit



                                                       
                              _________________________

          No. 92-2397

                              UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                      Appellee,

                                          v.

                                ALLAN W. ST. GERMAINE,
                             a/k/a ALLAN W. ST. GERMAIN,
                                Defendant, Appellant.

                                                       
                              _________________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                              FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

                       [Hon. Gene Carter, U.S. District Judge]
                                          ___________________

                                                       
                              _________________________


                                        Before

                                Selya, Cyr and Boudin,

                                   Circuit Judges.
                                   ______________

                                                       
                              _________________________


               Peter Clifford for appellant.
               ______________
               Nicholas  M. Gess,  Assistant United  States  Attorney, with
               _________________
          whom  Jay P. McCloskey, United States Attorney, was on brief, for
                ________________
          appellee.

                                                       
                              _________________________




                                                       
                              _________________________


















                    Per Curiam.  Having  carefully reviewed the record
                    Per Curiam
                    __________

               of  the proceedings below, we conclude, without serious

               question,   that,  before   the  district   court,  the


               appellant   withdrew  any  objection  to  the  proposed

               determination that  he should be sentenced  as an armed

               career   criminal  under   18   U.S.C.       922(g)(1),

               924(e)(1).  Because that issue was not preserved below,


               we  will not address it here.  See, e.g., United States
                                              ___  ____  _____________

               v. Dietz, 950  F.2d 50,  55 (1st Cir.  1991) ("We  have
                  _____

               repeatedly  ruled, in connection  with sentencing as in


               other contexts, that arguments not seasonably addressed

               to the trial court may not be raised for the first time

               in an  appellate venue.")  (collecting cases).   In any


               event, we are satisfied that appellant's prior criminal

               record brought him firmly within the ambit of the Armed

               Career  Criminal  Act.   See,  e.g.,  Taylor v.  United
                                        ___   ____   ______     ______

               States,  495 U.S.  575,  600 (1990);  United States  v.
               ______                                _____________


               Anderson, 921 F.2d 335, 339-40 (1st Cir. 1990).
               ________

                    We have examined appellant's remaining contentions

               and find them  meritless.  Consequently, we  need go no

               further.







                                          2














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




















































                                          3