Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-15-10989/USCOURTS-ca5-15-10989-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Juan Jose Garcia-De La Cruz
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-10989

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JUAN JOSE GARCIA-DE LA CRUZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:15-CR-33

Before DAVIS, JONES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Juan Jose Garcia-De La Cruz pleaded guilty to illegally reentering the 

United States after deportation. He objected to the presentence report arguing

that his sentence should not have been enhanced pursuant to 8 U.S.C. 

§ 1326(b). The district court overruled the objection. He received a withinguidelines sentence of 14 months of imprisonment and a 3-year term of 

supervised release.

 

* 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 28, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-10989 Document: 00513484383 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/28/2016
No. 15-10989

2

Garcia-De La Cruz argues that his sentence should not have been 

enhanced pursuant to § 1326(b) based on his commission of a felony before his 

prior deportation because that felony was not pleaded in the instant indictment 

and proved beyond a reasonable doubt. He challenges the validity of 

Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), in light of Apprendi 

v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), and Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 

2151 (2013). Garcia-De La Cruz concedes that his argument is foreclosed and 

raises it to preserve it for further review. In its unopposed motion for summary 

affirmance, the Government agrees that the issue is foreclosed and alternately 

moves for an extension of time to file a brief.

The motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, the alternative 

motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the judgment of 

the district court is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 15-10989 Document: 00513484383 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/28/2016