Filed: Nov. 09, 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 November 9, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-10652 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ANDRES ALARCON-AROS, also known as Andres Adrian Alarcon, also known as Andres Alarcon, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 1:04-CR-71-ALL - Before REAVLEY, GARZA, and BENAVIDES,
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT November 9, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-10652 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ANDRES ALARCON-AROS, also known as Andres Adrian Alarcon, also known as Andres Alarcon, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 1:04-CR-71-ALL - Before REAVLEY, GARZA, and BENAVIDES, 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 November 9, 2005
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 05-10652
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ANDRES ALARCON-AROS, also known as Andres
Adrian Alarcon, also known as Andres Alarcon,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:04-CR-71-ALL
--------------------
Before REAVLEY, GARZA, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Andres Alarcon-
Aros 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.