Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Gonzalez-Montiel, 05-41786 (2006)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 05-41786 Visitors: 32
Filed: Oct. 05, 2006
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 October 5, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-41786 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus GERONIMO GONZALEZ-MONTIEL, also known as Ricardo Gonzalez-Montiel, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:05-CR-1355-ALL - Before JONES, Chief Judge, and SMITH and STEWART, Circu
More
                                                       United States Court of Appeals
                                                                Fifth Circuit
                                                             F I L E D
               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                 October 5, 2006

                                                          Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                  Clerk
                            No. 05-41786
                        Conference Calendar


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                    Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

GERONIMO GONZALEZ-MONTIEL, also known as Ricardo
Gonzalez-Montiel,

                                    Defendant-Appellant.

                       --------------------
          Appeal from the United States District Court
               for the Southern District of Texas
                    USDC No. 5:05-CR-1355-ALL
                       --------------------

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Geronimo

Gonzalez-Montiel raises arguments that are foreclosed by

Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 
523 U.S. 224
, 235 (1998),

which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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