Court Opinion

ID: 9900914
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-20 19:00:49.297586+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:21:22.854014
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-10548         Document: 00516974097             Page: 1      Date Filed: 11/20/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 23-10548
                                     Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                     ____________                              November 20, 2023
                                                                                  Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Eduardo Garcia Briseno,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Northern District of Texas
                                USDC No. 3:22-CR-37-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Smith, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Eduardo Garcia Briseno appeals the sentence for his conviction under
   8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(1) for illegal reentry into the United States after
   removal. He contends that the enhancement of his sentence under § 1326(b)
   is unconstitutional because it was based on the fact of a prior conviction that
   was not alleged in the indictment and neither found by a jury nor admitted by

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-10548       Document: 00516974097          Page: 2   Date Filed: 11/20/2023

                                     No. 23-10548

   him.
           Garcia Briseno correctly concedes that this argument is foreclosed by
   Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), and he raises the
   issue merely to preserve it for further review. See United States v. Pervis,
   937 F.3d 546, 553–54 (5th Cir. 2019). The government therefore has moved
   without opposition for summary affirmance, or, alternatively, for an exten-
   sion of time to file its brief.
           Because summary affirmance is appropriate, see Groendyke Transp.,
   Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969), the motion for summary
   affirmance is GRANTED, the alternative motion for an extension is
   DENIED, and the judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                          2