Filed: Jun. 24, 2003
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT June 25, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 02-41221 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus GABRIEL ASTORGA-RAMIREZ, also known as Gabriel Astorga-Ramirez, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. L-98-CR-1076-ALL - Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT June 25, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 02-41221 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus GABRIEL ASTORGA-RAMIREZ, also known as Gabriel Astorga-Ramirez, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. L-98-CR-1076-ALL - Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT June 25, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 02-41221
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
GABRIEL ASTORGA-RAMIREZ,
also known as Gabriel Astorga-Ramirez,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. L-98-CR-1076-ALL
--------------------
Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Gabriel Astorga-Ramirez (“Astorga”) appeals the revocation
of supervised release on his conviction for possession with the
intent to distribute marihuana. Astorga seeks to challenge the
constitutionality of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) and (b) in light of
Apprendi v. New Jersey,
530 U.S. 466 (2000). Because a challenge
under Apprendi is not jurisdictional, he may not present this
claim in an appeal following the revocation of supervised
release. See United States v. Moody,
277 F.3d 719, 720-21
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 02-41221
-2-
(5th Cir. 2001). Moreover, as Astorga concedes, his Apprendi
argument is foreclosed by United States v. Slaughter,
238 F.3d
580, 582 (5th Cir. 2000). The judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.