Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Wilmer Jeovanny SIERRA-SUAZO, also known as Wilmer Geovany Sierra-Suazo, also known as Wilmer Geovany Suazo, also known as Wilmer Sierra, also known as Juan Carlos Mejia, also known as Juan Mejia, also known as Juan Carlos Aguilar-Barahona, also known as Juan Aguilar Barahona, also known as Juan Carlos Aguilar Barahona, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-07-13
Citations: 191 F. App'x 260
Docket Number: No. 05-51214
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Wilmer Jeovanny SIERRA-SUAZO, also known as Wilmer Geovany Sierra-Suazo, also known as Wilmer Geovany Suazo, also known as Wilmer Sier ra, also known as Juan Carlos Mejia, also known as Juan Mejia, also known as Juan Carlos Aguilar-Barahona, also known as Juan Aguilar Barahona, also known as Juan Carlos Aguilar Barahona, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 191
Pages: 260–261

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Wilmer Jeovanny SIERRA-SUAZO, also known as Wilmer Geovany Sierra-Suazo, also known as Wilmer Geovany Suazo, also known as Wilmer Sier ra, also known as Juan Carlos Mejia, also known as Juan Mejia, also known as Juan Carlos Aguilar-Barahona, also known as Juan Aguilar Barahona, also known as Juan Carlos Aguilar Barahona, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-51214.
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided July 13, 2006.
Joseph H. Gay, Jr, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
M. Carolyn Fuentes, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Wilmer Jeovanny Sierra-Suazo 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 offense. The Government's motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.