Court Opinion

ID: 9926208
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-01-24 01:00:35.94783+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:22:11.607175
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-10763       Document: 00517041706             Page: 1      Date Filed: 01/23/2024

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                    ____________
                                                                             United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                      Fifth Circuit
                                     No. 23-10763
                                   Summary Calendar                                 FILED
                                   ____________                               January 23, 2024
                                                                               Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                        Clerk

                                                                    Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                           versus

   Antonio Ochoa-Leyva,

                                             Defendant—Appellant.
                    ______________________________

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                              USDC No. 4:23-CR-39-1
                    ______________________________

   Before Jones, Southwick, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Antonio Ochoa-Leyva appeals the sentence imposed following his
   guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry after deportation in violation of
   8 U.S.C. § 1326. Renewing an argument made before the district court,
   Ochoa-Leyva challenges the application of the enhanced penalty range in

          _____________________
          *
              Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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   should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 23-10763      Document: 00517041706           Page: 2    Date Filed: 01/23/2024

                                     No. 23-10763

   § 1326(b) as unconstitutional, because it permits a defendant to be sentenced
   above the statutory maximum of § 1326(a) based on the fact of a prior
   conviction that was not alleged in the indictment or found by a jury beyond a
   reasonable doubt. As he correctly concedes, this issue is foreclosed by
   Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998). See United States v.
   Pervis, 937 F.3d 546, 553-54 (5th Cir. 2019). He raises the issue to preserve
   it for Supreme Court review. The Government has filed an unopposed
   motion for summary affirmance agreeing that the issue is foreclosed and, in
   the alternative, requesting an extension of time to file a brief.
          Because summary affirmance is appropriate, see Groendyke Trans., Inc.
   v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969), the Government’s motion is
   GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. The
   Government’s alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is
   DENIED.

                                           2