Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-03-41290/USCOURTS-ca5-03-41290-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jose Ramirez-Hareo
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 21, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-41290

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE RAMIREZ-HAREO, also known as

Jose Ilario Ramirez,

Defendant-Appellant.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. M-03-CR-473-1

--------------------

Before JOLLY, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jose Ramirez-Hareo appeals his conviction and sentence for

being an alien unlawfully found in the United States after

deportation after having been convicted of an aggravated felony

in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) & (b). For the first time on

appeal, Ramirez-Hareo argues that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) is

unconstitutional on its face and as applied in his case because

it does not require the fact of a prior felony or aggravated

 Case: 03-41290 Document: 005165001 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/21/2004
No. 03-41290

-2-

felony conviction to be charged in the indictment and proved

beyond a reasonable doubt. 

Ramirez-Hareo acknowledges that his arguments are foreclosed

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

he wishes to preserve the issues for Supreme Court review in

light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). Apprendi

did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi, 530 U.S. at

489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir.

2000). Thus, we must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until

the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” Dabeit, 231

F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

Accordingly, Ramirez-Hareo’s arguments are foreclosed, and

his conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.

 Case: 03-41290 Document: 005165001 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/21/2004