Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Percy MARTINEZ-CUADROS, aka Jose Martinez, also aka Rafael Cortez, aka Pabel Ramos, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-03-23
Citations: 7 F. App'x 13
Docket Number: No. 00-1454
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Percy MARTINEZ-CUADROS, aka Jose Martinez, also aka Rafael Cortez, aka Pabel Ramos, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Present CARDAMONE, LEVAL and KATZMANN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 7
Pages: 13–14

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Percy MARTINEZ-CUADROS, aka Jose Martinez, also aka Rafael Cortez, aka Pabel Ramos, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 00-1454.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
March 23, 2001.
Barry D. Leiwant, The Legal Aid Society, Federal Defender Division, New York, NY, for appellant.
Emily Berger & Noah B. Perlman, Assistant United States Attorneys, Eastern District of New York, Brooklyn, NY, for appellee.
Present CARDAMONE, LEVAL and KATZMANN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
SUMMARY ORDER
ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court be and it hereby is AFFIRMED.
Defendant appeals from a judgment entered after jury trial, convicting him of illegal re-entry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), and sentencing him pursuant to 1326(b)(2).
Defendant argues that his sentence is illegal under the principles articulated in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), but concedes that we are bound to affirm the judgment of the district court by the Supreme Court's decision in Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Even if defendant could be understood to argue that Almendarez-Torres was abrogated by Apprendi, that argument was squarely rejected by our recent decision in United States v. Latorre-Benavides, 241 F.3d 262 (2d Cir.2001) (per curiam). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.