Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Valenzuela-Parra, 05-50285 (2005)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 05-50285 Visitors: 35
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. 05-50285 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus REYDESEL VALENZUELA-PARRA, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:04-CR-2073-ALL - Before BENAVIDES, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appealing the Judgment in a 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. 05-50285
                        Conference Calendar



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                    Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

REYDESEL VALENZUELA-PARRA,

                                    Defendant-Appellant.

                       --------------------
          Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Western District of Texas
                    USDC No. 3:04-CR-2073-ALL
                       --------------------

Before BENAVIDES, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Reydesel

Valenzuela-Parra 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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