Filed: Jul. 14, 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 July 13, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-51274 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus DELFIN VELASQUES-ROJAS, also known as Gregorio Velasquez-Rojas, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:05-CR-144-ALL - Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIA
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT July 13, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-51274 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus DELFIN VELASQUES-ROJAS, also known as Gregorio Velasquez-Rojas, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:05-CR-144-ALL - Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT July 13, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 05-51274
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
DELFIN VELASQUES-ROJAS, also known
as Gregorio Velasquez-Rojas,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 5:05-CR-144-ALL
--------------------
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Delfin Velasques-
Rojas raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres
v. United States,
523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8
U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.