Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-07-04898/USCOURTS-ca4-07-04898-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Juan Nunez-Tiscareno
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-4898

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JUAN NUNEZ-TISCARENO,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees,

District Judge. (5:07-cr-00002-RLV)

Submitted: June 30, 2008 Decided: August 6, 2008

Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Claire J. Rauscher, Raquel Wilson, FEDERAL DEFENDERS OF WESTERN

NORTH CAROLINA, INC., Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellant.

Gretchen C. F. Shappert, United States Attorney, Charlotte, North

Carolina; Amy E. Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville,

North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 07-4898 Doc: 31 Filed: 08/06/2008 Pg: 1 of 3
*

Under § 1326(a), an alien who illegally returns to the United

States after being removed may be imprisoned for up to two years.

8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). However, § 1326(b)(2) provides that, if the

alien’s removal was subsequent to an aggravated felony, he faces a

maximum prison term of twenty years. 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2).

-2-

PER CURIAM:

Juan Nunez-Tiscareno pled guilty to illegal reentry

subsequent to a conviction for an aggravated felony, in violation

of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a),(b) (2000), and was sentenced to seventy-one

months’ imprisonment. He appeals, claiming that his sentence was

increased based on a prior conviction not alleged in the indictment

and, therefore, was unconstitutional.*

 We affirm.

At sentencing, the district court increased NunezTiscareno’s base offense level of 8 by 16 levels because a prior

state court conviction for trafficking in cocaine constituted an

aggravated felony within the meaning of U.S. Sentencing Guidelines

Manual § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(I) (2006). After a three-level reduction

for acceptance of responsibility, Nunez-Tiscareno’s total offense

level was determined to be 21. With a criminal history category of

IV, the resulting guidelines range was 57-71 months imprisonment;

the district court imposed a sentence at the top of the range. 

Nunez-Tiscareno asserts that the district court’s factual

finding with respect to his prior conviction violates the rule

announced in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). NunezTiscareno’s argument is foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s decision

in Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 233-36, 243-44

Appeal: 07-4898 Doc: 31 Filed: 08/06/2008 Pg: 2 of 3
-3-

(1998), which specifically held that, for purposes of § 1326, prior

convictions need not be determined by a jury beyond a reasonable

doubt. Additionally, this court has reaffirmed the continuing

validity of Almendarez-Torres after Apprendi and its progeny. See

United States v. Cheek, 415 F.3d 349, 351-54 (4th Cir. 2005). 

We therefore conclude that Nunez-Tiscareno’s claim is

without merit and affirm his sentence. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process. 

AFFIRMED

Appeal: 07-4898 Doc: 31 Filed: 08/06/2008 Pg: 3 of 3