Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Wilton Antonio Cerna-Salguero, Also Known as Juan Antonio Reyes, 04-3474 (2005)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 04-3474 Visitors: 8
Filed: Mar. 03, 2005
Latest Update: Feb. 12, 2020
Summary: 399 F.3d 887 UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Wilton Antonio CERNA-SALGUERO, also known as Juan Antonio Reyes, Appellant. No. 04-3474. United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. Submitted: January 18, 2005. Filed: March 3, 2005. Terry Wright, Des Moines, IA, for appellant. William C. Purdy, AUSA, Des Moines, IA, for appellee. Before MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, FAGG, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. 1 Wilton Antonio Cerna-Salguero pleaded guilty to one count of being an illegal al
More

399 F.3d 887

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
Wilton Antonio CERNA-SALGUERO, also known as Juan Antonio Reyes, Appellant.

No. 04-3474.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: January 18, 2005.

Filed: March 3, 2005.

Terry Wright, Des Moines, IA, for appellant.

William C. Purdy, AUSA, Des Moines, IA, for appellee.

Before MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, FAGG, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

1

Wilton Antonio Cerna-Salguero pleaded guilty to one count of being an illegal alien found in the United States following deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). The district court* increased Cerna-Salguero's sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2), which provides a maximum sentence of twenty years if the alien had an earlier aggravated felony conviction.

2

Cerna-Salguero appeals arguing § 1326(b)(2) is a separate crime and thus he has a Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial for violating and being sentenced under the statute. Cerna-Salguero acknowledges the Supreme Court rejected this argument in Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S. Ct. 1219, 140 L. Ed. 2d 350 (1998), and declined to revisit Almendarez-Torres in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 489-90, 120 S. Ct. 2348, 147 L. Ed. 2d 435 (2000), which held, "Other than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt." Cerna-Salguero also acknowledges we have continued to follow Almendarez-Torres after Apprendi. United States v. Perez-Perez, 337 F.3d 990, 997 (8th Cir.2003) (stating plain language of Apprendi excepts the fact of earlier convictions from its holding, and thus § 1326(b)(2) does not violate the Sixth Amendment); United States v. Alvarez, 320 F.3d 765, 767 (8th Cir.2002) (stating we must follow Almendarez-Torres until overruled by the Supreme Court); United States v. Kempis-Bonola, 287 F.3d 699, 702 (8th Cir.2002) (having refused to revisit Almendarez-Torres in Apprendi,"the legal landscape is clear: Almendarez-Torres has not been overruled"). Cerna-Salguero candidly acknowledges in his brief that his claim has been rejected by the Supreme Court and "unless pending [guidelines] cases change the law" his appeal fails. The Supreme Court has now decided these cases, and in so doing the Court did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See United States v. Booker, ___ U.S. ___, ___, 125 S. Ct. 738, 756, ___ L.Ed.2d ___, ___ (2005).

3

We thus reject Cerna-Salguero's Sixth Amendment challenge to his sentence, and affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47A(a).

Notes:

*

The Honorable Robert W. Pratt, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa

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