Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Sotelo, 07-40379 (2007)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 07-40379 Visitors: 55
Filed: Oct. 03, 2007
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED October 3, 2007 No. 07-40379 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. JESUS SOTELO Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:06-CR-1045-1 Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and WIENER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jesus Sotelo raises a
More
          IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                   FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
                                                  Fifth Circuit

                                                                 FILED
                                                                October 3, 2007
                                No. 07-40379
                             Conference Calendar            Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                    Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

                                           Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JESUS SOTELO

                                           Defendant-Appellant


                 Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Southern District of Texas
                          USDC No. 5:06-CR-1045-1


Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
      Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jesus Sotelo raises
arguments challenging the constitutionality of 21 U.S.C. ยงยง 841 and 851 that he
concedes are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 
523 U.S. 224
, 235
(1998).    United States v. Mata, 
491 F.3d 237
, 245 (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should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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.

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