Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-03-40836/USCOURTS-ca5-03-40836-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Juan Melo Osorio
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 03-40836 

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JUAN MELO OSORIO, also known as Jose Garcia-Santiago,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. B-03-CR-25-1

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

Before JOLLY, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Juan Melo Osorio appeals his conviction and sentence

for illegal reentry. He argues that the district court plainly

erred by characterizing his state felony conviction for simple

possession of cocaine as an “aggravated felony” for purposes of

U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C) and 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(B), when

that same offense was punishable only as a misdemeanor under 

 Case: 03-40836 Document: 0051115894 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/21/2004
No. 03-40836

-2-

federal law. This issue, however, is foreclosed by United States

v. Hinojosa-Lopez, 130 F.3d 691, 694 (5th Cir. 1997), and,

therefore, Osorio has not demonstrated plain error. 

Osorio also argues that the “felony” and “aggravated felony”

provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b) constitute an

unconstitutional sentencing provision. He acknowledges that his

argument is foreclosed, but he seeks to preserve the issue for

possible Supreme Court review in light of the Supreme Court’s

decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). As

Osorio concedes, this issue is foreclosed. See Almendarez-Torres

v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 247 (1998); United States v.

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

AFFIRMED. 

 Case: 03-40836 Document: 0051115894 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/21/2004