Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-03-41301/USCOURTS-ca5-03-41301-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Florencio Lazo-Raya
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 03-41301

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

FLORENCIO LAZO-RAYA,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. M-03-CR-548-1

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

Before JOLLY, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Florencio Lazo-Raya appeals his conviction of being present

in the United States following deportation. He argues, for the

first time on appeal, that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) is unconstitutional

because it treats a prior conviction for a felony or aggravated

felony as a sentencing factor and not as an element of the

offense. He also contends that his sentence is illegal because

his indictment did not allege that he committed an aggravated

felony before he was deported. Lazo-Raya’s arguments are

 Case: 03-41301 Document: 0051122361 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/21/2004
No. 03-41301

-2-

foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224,

235, 239-47 (1998). Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 489-90

(2000), did not overrule that decision. See United States v.

Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000). Thus, the district

court did not err in sentencing Lazo-Raya under 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(b). 

AFFIRMED. 

 Case: 03-41301 Document: 0051122361 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/21/2004