Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Ruben MEDINA, also known as Jose Rios Medina, also known as Jose Medina, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-06-16
Citations: 607 F. App'x 389
Docket Number: No. 14-41267
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Ruben MEDINA, also known as Jose Rios Medina, also known as Jose Medina, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DAVIS, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 607
Pages: 389–389

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Ruben MEDINA, also known as Jose Rios Medina, also known as Jose Medina, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-41267
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
June 16, 2015.
Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, Tx, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Timothy William Crooks, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Margaret Christina Ling, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before DAVIS, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
'Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Jose Ruben Medina raises an argument, that he concedes is foreclosed by United States v. Morales-Mota, 704 F.3d 410, 412 (5th Cir.2013), which rejected the argument that the Texas offense of "burglary of a habitation" is broader than the generic, contemporary definition of "burglary of a dwelling" under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(ii) because it defines the "owner" of a habitation as a person with a "greater right to possession of the property than the actor." Accordingly, the motion for summary disposition 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.