Filed: Dec. 06, 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 December 6, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III No. 06-20417 Clerk Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus SERGIO RIVAS-PRUNEDA, also known as Sergio Pruneda Rivas, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:05-CR-312-ALL - Before REAVLEY, STEWART, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM
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 6, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III No. 06-20417 Clerk Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus SERGIO RIVAS-PRUNEDA, also known as Sergio Pruneda Rivas, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:05-CR-312-ALL - Before REAVLEY, STEWART, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:..
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 6, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
No. 06-20417 Clerk
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
SERGIO RIVAS-PRUNEDA, also known as Sergio Pruneda Rivas,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:05-CR-312-ALL
--------------------
Before REAVLEY, STEWART, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Sergio Rivas-
Pruneda raises arguments that are foreclosed by United States v.
Garcia-Mendez,
420 F.3d 454, 457 (5th Cir. 2005), cert. denied,
126 S. Ct. 1398 (2006), which held that a Texas conviction for
burglary of a habitation was equivalent to burglary of a dwelling
and therefore was a crime of violence under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2.
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.