Barroca

MEMORANDUM **

Robert Barroca raises several challenges to his conviction for possession of firearms as a felon. First, he argues that his firearms conviction was based on evidence discovered by an unjustified protective sweep of his apparent residence following the arrest of his co-defendant, Jesus DeAIba. Second, he maintains that the government violated Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), by failing to disclose an internal affairs report and tapes of police dispatch calls that would have bolstered his defense. Third, Barroca contends that, in the alternative, his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to review the tapes of dispatch calls recorded during his arrest and the ensuing search.

In addition, Barroca appeals his separate sentence for several drug-related offenses to which he pled guilty. He contends that his sentence should be corrected so that he serves his sentence for his drug-related offenses concurrently, rather than consecutively, with his felon-in-possession sentence.

We conclude that Barroca is not entitled to a new trial or to an adjustment of his sentence. Whether or not the protective sweep and the…