Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Urbina-Perez, 00-51335 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 00-51335 Visitors: 25
Filed: Aug. 23, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-51335 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus OSCAR URBINA-PEREZ, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. SA-00-CR-339-ALL - August 23, 2001 Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Oscar Urbina-Perez appeals the 51-month term of imprisonment imposed following his guilty plea conviction of b
More
                 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                         FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT



                             No. 00-51335
                          Conference Calendar



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                           Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

OSCAR URBINA-PEREZ,

                                           Defendant-Appellant.

                          --------------------
             Appeal from the United States District Court
                   for the Western District of Texas
                       USDC No. SA-00-CR-339-ALL
                          --------------------
                             August 23, 2001

Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Oscar Urbina-Perez appeals the 51-month term of imprisonment

imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in

the United States after removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.

Urbina-Perez argues that his sentence should not have exceeded

the two-year maximum term of imprisonment prescribed in 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(a).     Urbina-Perez acknowledges that his argument is

foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres

v. United States, 
523 U.S. 224
(1998), but seeks to preserve the



     *
        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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 00-51335
                               -2-

issue for Supreme Court review in light of the decision in

Apprendi v. New Jersey, 
530 U.S. 466
(2000).

     Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres.   See 
Apprendi, 530 U.S. at 489-90
; United States v. Dabeit, 
231 F.3d 979
, 984

(5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 
121 S. Ct. 1214
(2001).   Urbina-

Perez’s argument is foreclosed.   The judgment of the district

court is AFFIRMED.

     The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief.   In its motion, the Government asks

that the judgment of the district court be affirmed and that an

appellee’s brief not be required.   The motion is GRANTED.

     AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer