Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Paxtor, 04-50813 (2004)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 04-50813 Visitors: 160
Filed: Dec. 17, 2004
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 December 17, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 04-50813 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus GUSTAVO ADOLFO PAXTOR, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 1:04-CR-121-ALL-LY - Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appealing the Jud
More
                                                       United States Court of Appeals
                                                                Fifth Circuit
                                                              F I L E D
               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                 December 17, 2004

                                                           Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                   Clerk
                             No. 04-50813
                         Conference Calendar



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                     Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

GUSTAVO ADOLFO PAXTOR,

                                     Defendant-Appellant.

                       --------------------
          Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Western District of Texas
                   USDC No. 1:04-CR-121-ALL-LY
                       --------------------

Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Gustavo Adolfo

Paxtor raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres

v. United States, 
523 U.S. 224
, 235 (1998), which held that a

prior conviction is a sentencing factor under 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(b)(2) and not a separate criminal offense.   The

Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the

judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.




     *
       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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.

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