Court Opinion

ID: 9908440
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-08 19:00:51.852884+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:49:11.934341
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-10613         Document: 00516995009             Page: 1      Date Filed: 12/08/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 23-10613
                                     Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                     ____________                               December 8, 2023
                                                                                  Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Jose Eulalio Aguillen-Servin,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Northern District of Texas
                               USDC No. 4:22-CR-375-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Willett, Duncan, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Jose Eulalio Aguillen-Servin appeals his sentence for illegal reentry
   after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(1). He argues that
   the enhancement of his sentence under § 1326(b) is unconstitutional because
   it is based on facts not alleged in the indictment and neither admitted nor
   proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Aguillen-Servin correctly concedes that

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-10613      Document: 00516995009           Page: 2     Date Filed: 12/08/2023

                                     No. 23-10613

   this argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S.
   224 (1998). We have held that subsequent Supreme Court decisions,
   including Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. 99 (2013), and Apprendi v. New
   Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), have not overruled Almendarez-Torres. See
   United States v. Pervis, 937 F.3d 546, 553–54 (5th Cir. 2019). Aguillen-Servin
   says that he raises this issue merely to preserve it for further review.
          The Government has filed an unopposed motion for summary
   affirmance or, in the alternative, for an extension of time to file a brief on the
   merits. Because Almendarez-Torres forecloses Aguillen-Servin’s argument,
   summary disposition is appropriate. See Groendyke Transp. Inc. v. Davis, 406
   F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969). Accordingly, 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 district court’s
   judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                           2