Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Andrew Garrett ALLARD, also known as Andres Garrett Allard, also known as Adrew Garrett Allard, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-08-21
Citations: 486 F. App'x 474
Docket Number: No. 12-50002
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Andrew Garrett ALLARD, also known as Andres Garrett Allard, also known as Adrew Garrett Allard, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before SMITH, ELROD, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 486
Pages: 474–474

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Andrew Garrett ALLARD, also known as Andres Garrett Allard, also known as Adrew Garrett Allard, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-50002
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Aug. 21, 2012.
Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Philip J. Lynch, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Donna F. Coltharp, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before SMITH, ELROD, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Andrew Garrett Allard raises arguments that he concedes are foreclosed by United States v. Heth, 596 F.3d 255, 258-59 & n. 3 (5th Cir.2010), which held that (1) the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) was a valid exercise of Congress's power under the Commerce Clause and (2) the defendant's conviction under SORNA did not violate his due process rights even though (a) the states in which he traveled had not yet implemented SORNA and (b) he had not received actual notice of SORNA's registration requirements. See United States v. Whaley, 577 F.3d 254, 258-62 (5th Cir.2009). The Government's motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, the Government's alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED, 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.