Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Estrada-Olivares, 01-40097 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 01-40097 Visitors: 31
Filed: Oct. 30, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-40097 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JUAN MIGUEL ESTRADA-OLIVARES, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-00-CR-361-1 - October 29, 2001 Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Juan Miguel Estrada-Olivares (Estrada) appeals his guilty- plea conviction for illegal reentry into the United S
More
                 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                         FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT



                              No. 01-40097
                          Conference Calendar



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                           Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JUAN MIGUEL ESTRADA-OLIVARES,

                                           Defendant-Appellant.

                      --------------------
          Appeal from the United States District Court
               for the Southern District of Texas
                     USDC No. B-00-CR-361-1
                      --------------------
                        October 29, 2001

Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Juan Miguel Estrada-Olivares (Estrada) appeals his guilty-

plea conviction for illegal reentry into the United States, in

violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.    Estrada contends that the district

court erred in ordering his federal sentence to run

consecutively, rather than concurrently, to his undischarged

state sentence.     Estrada’s argument is foreclosed by our decision

in United States v. Reyes-Lugo, 
238 F.3d 305
, 308-09 (5th Cir.),

cert denied, 
121 S. Ct. 2232
(2001).     Estrada, nevertheless,

seeks to preserve the issue for review by the Supreme Court.

     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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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