Filed: Aug. 25, 2006
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 August 25, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-41008 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus MANUEL DE JESUS RAMIREZ-PEREZ, also known as Antonio Garcia-Garcia, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:05-CR-180-ALL - Before DAVIS, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges. PER CU
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT August 25, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-41008 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus MANUEL DE JESUS RAMIREZ-PEREZ, also known as Antonio Garcia-Garcia, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:05-CR-180-ALL - Before DAVIS, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges. PER CUR..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT August 25, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 05-41008
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
MANUEL DE JESUS RAMIREZ-PEREZ, also known as
Antonio Garcia-Garcia,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 5:05-CR-180-ALL
--------------------
Before DAVIS, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Manuel De Jesus Ramirez-Perez (Ramirez-Perez) appeals his
conviction and 70-month sentence for illegal reentry of a
deported alien. Ramirez-Perez argues that the “felony” and
“aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and
(b)(2) are unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey,
530 U.S. 466 (2000).
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 05-41008
-2-
Ramirez-Perez’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by
Almendarez-Torres v. United States,
523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998).
Although Ramirez-Perez contends that Almendarez-Torres was
incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court
would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi, we have
repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that Almendarez-
Torres remains binding. See United States v. Garza-Lopez,
410
F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied,
126 S. Ct. 298 (2005).
Ramirez-Perez properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed
in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent, but he
raises it here to preserve it for further review.
AFFIRMED.