Case ID: f-appx_268/html/0331-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Antero PEREZ-GONZALEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 07-51296
    Conference Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    March 5, 2008.
    Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Ap-pellee.
    Henry Joseph Bemporad, Federal Public Defender, San Antonio, TX, for Defen-danb-Appellant.
    Before KING, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Antero Perez-Gonzalez raises arguments that are foreclosed by AlmendarezTorres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (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, — U.S.-, 128 S.Ct. 872, 169 L.Ed.2d 737 (2008). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The Government’s motion for summary affir-mance, which relies on inapposite authority, is DENIED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.