Case ID: f-appx_562/html/0822-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jamie CARILLO-LUCAS, a.k.a. Ijinio Carillo-Lucas, a.k.a. Julio C. Galdamez-Chanona, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 13-13819
    Non-Argument Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    April 3, 2014.
    Kathleen Mary Salyer, Emily M. Sma-chetti, Wifredo A. Ferrer, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Miami, FL, Aurora Fagan, U.S. Attorney’s Office, West Palm Beach, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Peter Vincent Birch, Federal Public Defender’s Office, West Palm Beach, FL, Michael Caruso, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Miami, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before TJOFLAT, WILSON and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Jamie Carillo-Lucas was convicted on a plea of guilty to the offense of reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(2), and the District Court sentenced him to prison for a term of 27 months. He appeals his sentence, arguing that the court unconstitutionally enhanced his sentence based on a prior conviction that was neither alleged in the indictment nor proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. He concedes that the Supreme Court has decided — and that this court has adhered to its decision — that a prior conviction need not be alleged in the indictment for the court to impose an enhanced sentence. He raises the issue to preserve it for further review in light of Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. -, 133 S.Ct. 2151, 186 L.Ed.2d 314 (2013).

In that Carillo-Lucas properly concedes that precedent forecloses his argument, his sentence is

AFFIRMED.