Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-02-41785/USCOURTS-ca5-02-41785-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Eloy Martinez-Vasquez
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 18, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-41785

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ELOY MARTINEZ-VASQUEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. L-02-CR-1005-ALL

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

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

PER CURIAM:*

Eloy Martinez-Vasquez (Martinez) appeals his guilty-plea

conviction for illegal reentry into the United States following

deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. For the first time

on appeal, Martinez argues that the sentencing provisions of 8

U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (2) are unconstitutional in light of

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

acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres 

v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but he seeks to preserve

 Case: 02-41785 Document: 0051296959 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/18/2004
No. 02-41785

-2-

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).

Martinez also challenges a condition of supervised release

set forth in the written judgment that prohibits him from

possessing “any other dangerous weapon.” Martinez 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. 

See United States v. Torres-Aguilar, 352 F.3d 934, 935-38 (5th

Cir. 2003).

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 02-41785 Document: 0051296959 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/18/2004