Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Cecena-Varela, 05-50715 (2005)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 05-50715 Visitors: 11
Filed: Dec. 14, 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 December 14, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-50715 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JORGE ALBERTO CECENA-VERELA, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:04-CR-2390-ALL - Before KING, Chief Judge, and HIGGINBOTHAM and SMITH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appealing
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 14, 2005

                                                           Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                   Clerk
                             No. 05-50715
                         Conference Calendar



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                     Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JORGE ALBERTO CECENA-VERELA,

                                     Defendant-Appellant.

                            --------------------
               Appeal from the United States District Court
                     for the Western District of Texas
                         USDC No. 3:04-CR-2390-ALL
                            --------------------

Before KING, Chief Judge, and HIGGINBOTHAM and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jorge Alberto

Cecena-Verela 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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