Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Cervantes-Ramirez, 07-51462 (2008)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 07-51462 Visitors: 18
Filed: Jun. 04, 2008
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 4, 2008 No. 07-51462 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. PEDRO CERVANTES-RAMIREZ Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:07-CR-428-ALL Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Pedr
More
          IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                   FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
                                                   Fifth Circuit

                                                                  FILED
                                                                  June 4, 2008
                                No. 07-51462
                             Conference Calendar             Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                     Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

                                            Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

PEDRO CERVANTES-RAMIREZ

                                            Defendant-Appellant


                 Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Western District of Texas
                         USDC No. 2:07-CR-428-ALL


Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
      Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Pedro Cervantes-Ramirez
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.        United States v. Pineda-
Arrellano, 
492 F.3d 624
, 625 (5th Cir. 2007), cert. denied, 
128 S. Ct. 872
(2008).




      *
      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should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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. 07-51462

The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the
judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.




                                    2

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