Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Santos RODRIGUEZ-ESPINOZA, also known as Santos Joe Rodriguez-Espinoza, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-12-05
Citations: 255 F. App'x 923
Docket Number: No. 07-40685
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Santos RODRIGUEZ-ESPINOZA, also known as Santos Joe Rodriguez-Espinoza, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 255
Pages: 923–924

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Santos RODRIGUEZ-ESPINOZA, also known as Santos Joe Rodriguez-Espinoza, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 07-40685
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Dec. 5, 2007.
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, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jose Santos Rodriguez-Espinoza raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 528 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. See United States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir.2007), petition for cert. filed (Aug. 28, 2007) (No. 07-6202). The appellant's motion for summary disposition 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.