Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Herrera-Hernandez, 18-30644 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 18-30644 Visitors: 1
Filed: Feb. 16, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-50610 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JOSE LUIS HERRERA-HERNANDEZ, also known as Jose Luis Hernandez, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-00-CR-33-1-H - - - - - - - - - - February 15, 2001 Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Jose Luis Herrera-Hernandez appe
More
               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT




                            No. 00-50610
                        Conference Calendar



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                         Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus

JOSE LUIS HERRERA-HERNANDEZ, also known as
Jose Luis Hernandez,


                                         Defendant-Appellant.

                        - - - - - - - - - -
          Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Western District of Texas
                     USDC No. EP-00-CR-33-1-H
                        - - - - - - - - - -
                         February 15, 2001

Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Jose Luis Herrera-Hernandez appeals his sentence following

his guilty plea conviction for illegal re-entry after deportation

in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.   Herrera argues that his

sentence should not have exceeded the two-year maximum sentence

under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).   Herrera acknowledges that his argument

is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 
523 U.S. 224
(1998), but he seeks to preserve the issue for Supreme Court

review in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 
530 U.S. 466
(2000).

     *
        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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
                          No. 00-50610
                              - 2 -

     Herrera’s argument is foreclosed by 
Almendarez-Torres, 523 U.S. at 235
.

     The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief.   In its motion, the Government asks

that the judgment of the district court be affirmed and that an

appellee’s brief not be required.   The motion is granted.

     AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.

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