Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Delmoral, 05-40471 (2005)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 05-40471 Visitors: 6
Filed: Nov. 09, 2005
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 November 9, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-40471 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus MARCOS ANTONIO DELMORAL, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:04-CR-109-ALL - Before DAVIS, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Marcos Antonio Delmoral appeals from th
More
                                                        United States Court of Appeals
                                                                 Fifth Circuit
                                                              F I L E D
                IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                November 9, 2005

                                                           Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                   Clerk
                             No. 05-40471
                           Summary Calendar


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                     Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MARCOS ANTONIO DELMORAL,

                                     Defendant-Appellant.

                       --------------------
          Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Eastern District of Texas
                     USDC No. 4:04-CR-109-ALL
                       --------------------

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

 PER CURIAM:*

     Marcos Antonio Delmoral appeals from the sentence imposed

following his guilty plea to illegal reentry into the United

States following deportation.    See 8 U.S.C. § 1326.    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).    He concedes that his challenge

is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 
523 U.S. 224
, 235 (1998), and he raises it to preserve it for further

review by the Supreme Court.

     *
       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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 05-40471
                                 - 2 -

       Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres.   See 
Apprendi, 530 U.S. at 489-90
; United States v. Dabeit, 
231 F.3d 979
, 984

(5th Cir. 2000).     We therefore must follow Almendarez-Torres

“unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule

it.”    
Dabeit, 231 F.3d at 984
(internal quotation marks and

citation omitted).

       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