Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Nain REYES-REYES, also known as Juan Nain Reyes, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-01-05
Citations: 628 F. App'x 280
Docket Number: No. 13-41262
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Nain REYES-REYES, also known as Juan Nain Reyes, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before WIENER, HIGGINSON, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 628
Pages: 280–281

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Nain REYES-REYES, also known as Juan Nain Reyes, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 13-41262
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Jan. 5, 2016.
Terri-Lei O’Malley, Renata Ann Gowie, U.S. Attorney’S Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Laura Fletcher Leavitt, Assistant Federal Public Defender, H. Michael Soko-low, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before WIENER, HIGGINSON, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Defendant-Appellant Juan Nain Reyes-Reyes appeals the 46-month sentence imposed following his conviction for being present in the United States illegally following removal. He challenges the sixteen-level enhancement imposed under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(i), which was based on his Texas conviction for posses sion with intent to deliver more than 200 grams but less than 400 grams of cocaine. He argues that this conviction does not qualify as a drug trafficking offense because Texas's definition of delivery, which includes administering, is broader than the definition of a drug trafficking offense under § 2L1.2. For the same reasons, he contends that the Texas offense does not qualify as an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2).
His arguments are foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Teran-Salas, 767 F.3d 453 (5th Cir.2014), cert, denied, — U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 1892, 191 L.Ed.2d 767 (2015). In that case, we held that there is no realistic probability that Texas would prosecute the crime under an "administering" theory in a way that does not also constitute either "dispensing" or "distributing" under the federal sentencing guidelines. We noted that "[e]ven without considering the drug type or quantity, conviction under the administer prong is not a realistic probability because no previous Texas case has involved a conviction under this prong." Id. at 461. The Texas offense of possession with intent to deliver cocaine is therefore a drug trafficking offense under the Guidelines and an aggravated felony under § 1326(b). See id. at 461-62 & n. 5.
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.