Court Opinion

ID: 9412516
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-31 18:00:41.2535+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:41:37.203815
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-51088            Document: 00516839708             Page: 1      Date Filed: 07/31/2023

                 United States Court of Appeals
                      for the Fifth Circuit
                                        _____________
                                                                                   United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                            Fifth Circuit
                                         No. 22-51088
                                     consolidated with                                     FILED
                                         No. 22-51089                                    July 31, 2023
                                       Summary Calendar                              Lyle W. Cayce
                                       _____________                                      Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                                          Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                                versus

   Marcos Rios-Mendez,

                                                  Defendant—Appellant.
                         ______________________________

                         Appeal from the United States District Court
                              for the Western District of Texas
                                 USDC Nos. 4:22-CR-435-1,
                                       4:18-CR-531-6
                         ______________________________

   Before Jones, Haynes, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
             Marcos Rios-Mendez appeals his conviction and sentence for illegal
   entry into the United States after deportation under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and
   (b)(2).        For the first time on appeal, he argues that the recidivism

             _____________________
             *
                 This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-51088       Document: 00516839708        Page: 2    Date Filed: 07/31/2023

                                       22-51088
                                   c/w No. 22-51089

   enhancement in § 1326(b) is unconstitutional because it permits a sentence
   above the otherwise-applicable statutory maximum established by § 1326(a),
   based on facts that are neither alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury
   beyond a reasonable doubt. While Rios-Mendez acknowledges this argument
   is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), he
   nevertheless seeks to preserve it for possible Supreme Court review. In
   addition, Rios-Mendez has filed an unopposed motion for summary
   disposition.
            This court has held that subsequent Supreme Court decisions such as
   Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. 99 (2013), and Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530
   U.S. 466 (2000), did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See United States v.
   Pervis, 937 F.3d 546, 553-54 (5th Cir. 2019). Thus, Rios-Mendez is correct
   that his argument is foreclosed, and summary disposition is appropriate. See
   Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969).
            As Rios-Mendez raises no issue with respect to the revocation of his
   supervised release, he has abandoned any challenge to the revocation or
   revocation sentence. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir.
   1993).
            Rios-Mendez’s motion is GRANTED, and the district court’s
   judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                              2