Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Galicia-Pena, 05-50048 (2005)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 05-50048 Visitors: 16
Filed: Aug. 18, 2005
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 August 17, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-50048 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JOSE ROBERT GALICIA-PENA, also known as Jose Roberto Galicia-Pena, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:03-CR-721-1 - Before BENAVIDES, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER C
More
                                                       United States Court of Appeals
                                                                Fifth Circuit
                                                               F I L E D
               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                   August 17, 2005

                                                            Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                    Clerk
                            No. 05-50048
                        Conference Calendar



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                      Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE ROBERT GALICIA-PENA, also
known as Jose Roberto Galicia-Pena,

                                      Defendant-Appellant.

                       --------------------
          Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Western District of Texas
                      USDC No. 2:03-CR-721-1
                       --------------------

Before BENAVIDES, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Jose Robert Galicia-Pena (“Galicia”) appeals following his

conviction in a bench trial for illegal reentry after

deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.    Galicia argues

that the district court committed reversible plain error by

increasing the maximum authorized Guidelines sentence based on

facts neither admitted nor found by a jury, and by imposing a

sentence under a mandatory Guidelines scheme.    Galicia correctly

concedes that he cannot carry his burden of showing that 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 05-50048
                               -2-

district court’s error affected his substantial rights.     See

United States v. Valenzuela-Quevedo, 
407 F.3d 728
, 733-34 (5th

Cir. 2005), petition for cert. filed (July 25, 2005) (No.

05-5556); United States v. Mares, 
402 F.3d 511
, 521 (5th Cir.

2005), petition for cert. filed (Mar. 31, 2005) (No. 04-9517).

     Galicia also argues that because his indictment did not

allege a prior felony conviction, he was subject to a maximum

sentence of two years under U.S.C. § 1326(a).   He correctly

acknowledges that his argument is 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.

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