Filed: Aug. 23, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-50151 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ANGEL HERNANDEZ-ESPINOZA, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. DR-00-CR-265-1-FB - August 23, 2001 Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Angel Hernandez-Espinoza appeals the 46-month term of imprisonment imposed following his guilty plea co
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-50151 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ANGEL HERNANDEZ-ESPINOZA, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. DR-00-CR-265-1-FB - August 23, 2001 Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Angel Hernandez-Espinoza appeals the 46-month term of imprisonment imposed following his guilty plea con..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-50151
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ANGEL HERNANDEZ-ESPINOZA,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. DR-00-CR-265-1-FB
--------------------
August 23, 2001
Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Angel Hernandez-Espinoza appeals the 46-month term of
imprisonment imposed following his guilty plea conviction of
illegally reentering the United States after removal in violation
of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Hernandez-Espinoza argues that his sentence
should not have exceeded the two-year maximum term of
imprisonment prescribed in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Hernandez-
Espinoza 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 issue for Supreme
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 01-50151
-2-
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).
Hernandez-Espinoza’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.