Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Arturo ZEPEDA-CARDENAS, also known as Arturo Contreras-Zepeda, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-07-11
Citations: 284 F. App'x 214
Docket Number: No. 07-51371
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Arturo ZEPEDA-CARDENAS, also known as Arturo Contreras-Zepeda, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before JOLLY, DENNIS and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 284
Pages: 214–215

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Arturo ZEPEDA-CARDENAS, also known as Arturo Contreras-Zepeda, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 07-51371
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
July 11, 2008.
Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Federal Public Defender’s Office Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before JOLLY, DENNIS and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Jose Arturo Zepeda-Cardenas, a/k/a Arturo Contreras-Zepeda, pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after deportation and was sentenced to 24 months of imprisonment and two years of supervised release. Zepeda-Cardenas raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal of fense. United States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir.2007), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 128 S.Ct. 872, 169 L.Ed.2d 737 (2008). The Government's motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, the motion for extension of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.