Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-20-50322/USCOURTS-ca5-20-50322-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Antonio Huerta-Nunez
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Fifth Circuit 

No. 20-50322 

Summary Calendar 

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee, 

versus

Antonio Huerta-Nunez, 

Defendant—Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Western District of Texas 

USDC No. 1:19-CR-313-1 

Before Wiener, Southwick, and Duncan, Circuit Judges. 

Per Curiam:*

Antonio Huerta-Nunez appeals his sentence of 21 months of 

imprisonment and two years of supervised release, which the district court 

imposed following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry. He argues 

that the recidivism enhancement under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) is 

*

 Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4. 

United States Court of Appeals 

Fifth Circuit 

FILED 

November 10, 2020 

Lyle W. Cayce 

Clerk 

Case: 20-50322 Document: 00515633320 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/10/2020
No. 20-50322 

2 

unconstitutional because it allows a sentence above the otherwise applicable 

statutory maximum based on facts that are neither alleged in the indictment 

nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. He concedes that the issue is 

foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but he 

seeks to preserve the issue for further review. The Government moves for 

summary affirmance, asserting that Huerta-Nunez’s argument is foreclosed. 

The parties are correct that Huerta-Nunez’s assertion is foreclosed by 

Almendarez-Torres. 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). Accordingly, the Government’s motion for summary affirmance is 

GRANTED, see Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th 

Cir. 1969), 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: 20-50322 Document: 00515633320 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/10/2020