Filed: Dec. 14, 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 December 14, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-50911 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus HORACIO VELO-VILLEGAS, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:04-CR-2211-1 - Before KING, Chief Judge, and HIGGINBOTHAM and SMITH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appealing the Jud
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 14, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-50911 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus HORACIO VELO-VILLEGAS, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:04-CR-2211-1 - Before KING, Chief Judge, and HIGGINBOTHAM and SMITH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appealing the Judg..
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 14, 2005
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 05-50911
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
HORACIO VELO-VILLEGAS,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 3:04-CR-2211-1
--------------------
Before KING, Chief Judge, and HIGGINBOTHAM and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Horacio Velo-
Villegas raises arguments that are foreclosed by United States v.
Doggett,
230 F.3d 160, 166 (5th Cir. 2000), which held that
Almendarez-Torres v. United States,
523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998),
still controls prior conviction enhancements under 21 U.S.C.
§ 841, notwithstanding Apprendi v. New Jersey,
530 U.S. 466
(2000). 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.