Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Antonio GUTIERREZ-BARRAGAN, also known as Jose Antonio Gutierrez, also known as Alfonso Guitterez, also known as Jose Antonio Barragan, also known as Antonio Campillo, 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. 07-40602
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Antonio GUTIERREZ-BARRAGAN, also known as Jose Antonio Gutierrez, also known as Alfonso Guitterez, also known as Jose Antonio Barragan, also known as Antonio Campillo, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 255
Pages: 923–923

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Antonio GUTIERREZ-BARRAGAN, also known as Jose Antonio Gutierrez, also known as Alfonso Guitterez, also known as Jose Antonio Barragan, also known as Antonio Campillo, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 07-40602
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 Antonio Gutierrez-Barragan raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.