Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-19-50788/USCOURTS-ca5-19-50788-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Javier Galindo-Caballero
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-50788

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JAVIER GALINDO-CABALLERO,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:19-CR-82-1

Before JOLLY, JONES, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Javier Galindo-Caballero appeals the 54-month sentence imposed 

following conviction based on his guilty plea of illegal reentry after having been 

previously removed. He argues that his sentence was imposed under an 

unconstitutional statute, 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b). Specifically, he contends that in 

order to trigger a sentencing enhancement under Section 1326(b), the fact of a 

prior conviction must be alleged in the indictment and proven to a jury; 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 2, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 19-50788 Document: 00515369463 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/02/2020
No. 19-50788

2

therefore, he asserts that Section 1326(b) is unconstitutional. He correctly 

concedes that his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United 

States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but he makes the argument to preserve it for 

further possible review. See United States v. Wallace, 759 F.3d 486, 497 (5th 

Cir. 2014); United States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625–26 (5th Cir. 

2007).

The Government has filed an unopposed motion for summary affirmance 

and, alternatively, seeks an extension of time to file its brief. Because the issue 

is foreclosed, summary affirmance is appropriate. See Groendyke Transp., Inc. 

v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969).

Accordingly, the Government’s motion for summary affirmance is 

GRANTED, the Government’s alternative motion for an extension of time to 

file a brief is DENIED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Case: 19-50788 Document: 00515369463 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/02/2020