Filed: Aug. 18, 2004
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS August 18, 2004 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 04-50319 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus IGNACIO CASTRO-BALDERAS, also known as Stephen Medina-Telfino, also known as Alfonso Luna, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-03-CR-2059-ALL-DB - Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS August 18, 2004 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 04-50319 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus IGNACIO CASTRO-BALDERAS, also known as Stephen Medina-Telfino, also known as Alfonso Luna, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-03-CR-2059-ALL-DB - Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and P..
More
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS August 18, 2004 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 04-50319 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus IGNACIO CASTRO-BALDERAS, also known as Stephen Medina-Telfino, also known as Alfonso Luna, Defendant-Appellant. -------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-03-CR-2059-ALL-DB -------------------- Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PICKERING, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Ignacio Castro- Balderas concedes that the arguments raised are foreclosed by circuit precedent but seeks to preserve them for further review. The Government has moved for summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. The motion 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.
