Filed: Feb. 07, 2007
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 February 7, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 06-41130 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus PRIMITIVO JUAN CARRIZALES-CEDILLO, also known as Juan Carrizales-Cedillo, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:06-CR-151-ALL - Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Ju
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT February 7, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 06-41130 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus PRIMITIVO JUAN CARRIZALES-CEDILLO, also known as Juan Carrizales-Cedillo, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:06-CR-151-ALL - Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Jud..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT February 7, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 06-41130
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
PRIMITIVO JUAN CARRIZALES-CEDILLO, also known as Juan
Carrizales-Cedillo,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:06-CR-151-ALL
--------------------
Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Primitivo Juan
Carrizales-Cedillo 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.