Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Sandoval-Resendiz, 05-51419 (2006)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 05-51419 Visitors: 54
Filed: Oct. 05, 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 October 5, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-51419 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JESUS SANDOVAL-RESENDIZ, also known as Jesus Sandoval-Resendez, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:05-CR-736-ALL - Before JONES, Chief Judge, and SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Ju
More
                                                       United States Court of Appeals
                                                                Fifth Circuit
                                                               F I L E D
               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                   October 5, 2006

                                                            Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                    Clerk
                            No. 05-51419
                        Conference Calendar


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                      Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JESUS SANDOVAL-RESENDIZ, also known
as Jesus Sandoval-Resendez,

                                      Defendant-Appellant.

                         --------------------
            Appeal from the United States District Court
                  for the Western District of Texas
                       USDC No. 3:05-CR-736-ALL
                         --------------------

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jesus Sandoval-

Resendiz 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.

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