Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-03-40588/USCOURTS-ca5-03-40588-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jesus Gonzales-Garcia
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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

F I L E D

February 17, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-40588

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JESUS GONZALES-GARCIA,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. L-02-CR-1402-ALL

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

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jesus Gonzales-Garcia (Gonzales) appeals his guilty-plea

conviction for illegal reentry into the United States following

an aggravated felony conviction in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. 

For the first time on appeal, Gonzales argues that the sentencing

provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) & (2) are unconstitutional in

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

Gonzales acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by

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

 Case: 03-40588 Document: 0051136999 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/17/2004
No. 03-40588

-2-

seeks to preserve the issue for Supreme Court review. 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). 

Gonzales also challenges a condition of supervised release

set forth in the written judgment that prohibits him from

possessing “any other dangerous weapon.” Gonzales argues that

this provision must be deleted from the written judgment because

the district court did not mention the condition when it orally

pronounced sentence. We find no error in the written judgment. 

This issue now is also foreclosed. See United States v. TorresAguilar, 352 F.3d 934, 935-37 (5th Cir. 2003). 

AFFIRMED. 

 Case: 03-40588 Document: 0051136999 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/17/2004