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
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, Circui..
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.