Filed: Oct. 20, 2009
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 20, 2009 No. 09-20104 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. JUAN JOSE MADRID, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:00-CR-621-1 Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Juan Jose
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED October 20, 2009 No. 09-20104 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. JUAN JOSE MADRID, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:00-CR-621-1 Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Juan Jose ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
October 20, 2009
No. 09-20104
Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
JUAN JOSE MADRID,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:00-CR-621-1
Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Juan Jose Madrid
raises arguments that he concedes are foreclosed by United States v. Lopez-Ortiz,
313 F.3d 225, 229-31 (5th Cir. 2002), which held that an immigration judge’s
failure to inform an alien of his eligibility for discretionary waiver of removal at
his removal proceeding did not render the proceeding fundamentally unfair. See
Romero-Rodriguez v. Gonzales,
488 F.3d 672, 677 n.5 (5th Cir. 2007). The
appellant’s unopposed motion for summary disposition 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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.