Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Monico GUDINO-ESTRADA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-07-13
Citations: 181 F. App'x 486
Docket Number: No. 05-41724
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Monico GUDINO-ESTRADA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 181
Pages: 486–487

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Monico GUDINO-ESTRADA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-41724.
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided July 13, 2006.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Laura Fletcher Leavitt, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Molly E. Odom, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Monico Gudino-Estrada raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 528 U.S. 224, 285, 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.