Filed: Oct. 30, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-41459 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus LEONARDO GARCIA-CARRERA, also known as Pedro Hernandez-Garcia Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-00-CR-309-1 - October 29, 2001 Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Leonardo Garcia-Carrera appeals the 100-month sentence imposed following his ple
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-41459 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus LEONARDO GARCIA-CARRERA, also known as Pedro Hernandez-Garcia Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-00-CR-309-1 - October 29, 2001 Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Leonardo Garcia-Carrera appeals the 100-month sentence imposed following his plea..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-41459
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
LEONARDO GARCIA-CARRERA, also known as
Pedro Hernandez-Garcia
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. B-00-CR-309-1
--------------------
October 29, 2001
Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Leonardo Garcia-Carrera appeals the 100-month sentence
imposed following his plea of guilty to a charge of being found
in the United States after deportation, a violation of 8 U.S.C.
§ 1326. He contends that the felony conviction that resulted in
his increased sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) was an element
of the offense that should have been charged in the indictment.
Garcia acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by the
Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres v. United States,
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 00-41459
-2-
523 U.S. 224 (1998), but he seeks to preserve the 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). Torres’s
argument is foreclosed. The judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.