Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Allan Edgardo CARCAMO-RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-02-15
Citations: 411 F. App'x 763
Docket Number: No. 10-40205
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Allan Edgardo CARCAMO-RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before HIGGINBOTHAM, GARZA, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 411
Pages: 763–763

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Allan Edgardo CARCAMO-RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 10-40205
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Feb. 15, 2011.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Sarah Beth Landau, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, GARZA, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Allan Edgardo Carcamo-Ramirez (Carcamo) appeals the sentence imposed following his conviction for being found in the United States after a previous deportation pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Carcamo contends that the district court erred by imposing a 16-level crime of violence enhancement based on his prior Texas conviction for indecency by contact with a child under 17 years of age, a violation of Texas Penal Code § 21.11(a)(2). He argues that the Texas conviction is not within the enumerated offense of sexual abuse of a minor because an offense under § 21.11(a) can be committed against a victim who is 16 years of age. The Government moves for summary affirmance or, in the alternative, for an extension of time to file a brief.
As Carcamo concedes, his argument is foreclosed by circuit precedent. See United States v. Ayala, 542 F.3d 494, 495 (5th Cir.2008); United States v. Zavala-Sustaita, 214 F.3d 601, 604 (5th Cir.2000). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED, and the Government's motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED. The alternative request for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.