Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Castorena-Ramirez, 04-50716 (2004)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 04-50716 Visitors: 35
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. 04-50716 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ADRIAN CASTORENA-RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:04-CR-131-1-AML - Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appealing the J
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. 04-50716
                        Conference Calendar



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                    Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ADRIAN CASTORENA-RAMIREZ,

                                    Defendant-Appellant.

                       --------------------
          Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Western District of Texas
                    USDC No. 2:04-CR-131-1-AML
                       --------------------

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

PER CURIAM:*

     Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Adrian Castorena-

Ramirez raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres

v. United States, 
523 U.S. 224
, 235 (1998), which held that a

prior conviction is a sentencing factor under 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(b)(2) and not a separate criminal offense.   The

Government’s motion for summary affirmance 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.

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