Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Eliseo ARAICA-ROMERO, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-02-07
Citations: 216 F. App'x 456
Docket Number: No. 06-41149
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Eliseo ARAICA-ROMERO, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 216
Pages: 456–457

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Eliseo ARAICA-ROMERO, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-41149
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Feb. 7, 2007.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jose Elíseo Araica-Romero 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. 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.