Case ID: f-appx_220/html/0344-01.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. Sofia Marisol LANDIN-MARTINEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 05-41569
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    March 5, 2007.
    James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Bowen W. Sutton, Law Offices of Bowen W. Sutton, San Antonio, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.
    Before DeMOSS, STEWART and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Sofia Marisol Landin-Martinez (Landin) appeals her guilty-plea conviction of, and 41-month sentence for, violating 8 U.S.C. § 1326 by being found in the United States without permission after deportation. Landin argues, in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), that the 41-month term of imprisonment imposed in her case exceeds the statutory maximum sentence allowed for the § 1326 offense charged in her indictment. She challenges the constitutionality of § 1326(b)’s treatment of prior felony and aggravated felony convictions as sentencing factors rather than elements of the offense that must be found by a jury.

Landin’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). This court has repeatedly rejected the argument raised by Landin on the basis that AlmendarezTorres remains binding despite Apprendi. See United States v. Garzar-Lopez, 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 298, 163 L.Ed.2d 260 (2005). Landin acknowledges that her argument is unavailing in light of Almendarez-Torres, but she raises it here to preserve it for further review.

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       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.