Filed: Apr. 13, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-10928 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus REYNALDO JUAREZ-VILLALON, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:00-CR-7-1-Y - April 12, 2001 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Reynaldo Juarez-Villalon appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for illegal reentry by a previously dep
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-10928 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus REYNALDO JUAREZ-VILLALON, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:00-CR-7-1-Y - April 12, 2001 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Reynaldo Juarez-Villalon appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for illegal reentry by a previously depo..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-10928
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
REYNALDO JUAREZ-VILLALON,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:00-CR-7-1-Y
--------------------
April 12, 2001
Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Reynaldo Juarez-Villalon appeals from his guilty-plea
conviction and sentence for illegal reentry by a previously
deported alien in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Juarez-Villalon
argues that in view of Apprendi v. New Jersey,
530 U.S. 466,
120
S. Ct. 2348, 2362-63 (2000), his prior felony conviction was an
element of the offense under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) and not merely
a sentence enhancement. He acknowledges that his argument is
foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States,
523 U.S. 224,
247 (1998), but states that he is preserving it for possible
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 00-10928
-2-
Supreme Court review because the Supreme Court indicated in
Apprendi that Almendarez-Torres may have been wrongly decided.
Because the Supreme Court has not overruled
Almendarez-Torres, this court is compelled to follow it. See
United States v. Dabeit,
231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000), cert.
denied,
121 S. Ct. 1214 (2001). Accordingly, the judgment is
AFFIRMED.