Filed: Sep. 06, 2007
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 September 6, 2007 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 07-50245 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. EZEQUIEL CHACON-CAMACHO, also known as Julio Gaytan-Camacho Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:06-CR-1574-ALL Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appealing
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS September 6, 2007 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 07-50245 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. EZEQUIEL CHACON-CAMACHO, also known as Julio Gaytan-Camacho Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:06-CR-1574-ALL Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appealing t..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
September 6, 2007
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 07-50245
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
EZEQUIEL CHACON-CAMACHO, also known as Julio Gaytan-Camacho
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 3:06-CR-1574-ALL
Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Ezequiel Chacon-Camacho
raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States,
523
U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. ยง 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision
and not a separate criminal offense. See United States v. Pineda-Arrellano,
492
F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir. 2007). 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should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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.