Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. San Martin, 04-40608 (2004)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 04-40608 Visitors: 1
Filed: Dec. 17, 2004
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 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT December 17, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 04-40608 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ARTURO SAN MARTIN, also known as, Ricardo Hernandez-Lozano, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:03-CR-683-ALL - Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Jud
More
                                                       United States Court of Appeals
                                                                Fifth Circuit
                                                             F I L E D
               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                December 17, 2004

                                                          Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                  Clerk
                            No. 04-40608
                        Conference Calendar



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                    Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ARTURO SAN MARTIN, also known as,
Ricardo Hernandez-Lozano,
                                    Defendant-Appellant.

                      --------------------
          Appeal from the United States District Court
               for the Southern District of Texas
                    USDC No. 7:03-CR-683-ALL
                      --------------------

Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Arturo San Martin appeals his guilty-plea conviction and

sentence for illegal reentry after deportation.    He argues that

the “felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(b)(1) and (2) are unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v.

New Jersey, 
530 U.S. 466
(2000), and that his sentence is

improper under Blakely v. Washington, 
124 S. Ct. 2531
(2004).

These arguments are, as he concedes, foreclosed.    See

Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 
523 U.S. 224
(1998); United

     *
        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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 04-40608
                               -2-

States v. Pineiro, 
377 F.3d 464
, 465-66 (5th Cir. 2004), petition

for cert. filed (U.S. July 14, 2004) (No. 04-5263); United States

v. Dabeit, 
231 F.3d 979
, 984 (5th Cir. 2000).   San Martin’s

conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.

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