Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mario SANCHEZ-PEREZ, also known as Jesus Corona-Leon, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-10-05
Citations: 201 F. App'x 292
Docket Number: No. 05-20445
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mario SANCHEZ-PEREZ, also known as Jesus Corona-Leon, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before JONES, Chief Judge, and SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 201
Pages: 292–293

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mario SANCHEZ-PEREZ, also known as Jesus Corona-Leon, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-20445
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Oct. 5, 2006.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Margaret Christina Ling, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Mario Sanchez-Perez raises arguments that are foreclosed by United States v. Nava-Perez, 242 F.3d 277, 279 (5th Cir. 2001), which held that an alien's removal, on reinstatement of a prior order of removal, was a separate and distinct event from his original removal, such that the alien had been removed subsequent to an aggravated felony conviction, and 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.