Court Opinion

ID: 9384165
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-01 00:00:34.853569+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:51.074002
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-50859         Document: 00516696919             Page: 1      Date Filed: 03/31/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________                             United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit

                                       No. 22-50859
                                                                                      FILED
                                                                                 March 31, 2023
                                     Summary Calendar
                                     ____________                                 Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                       Clerk
   United States of America,

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Elmer Alexander Martinez-Amaya,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                           for the Western District of Texas
                               USDC No. 4:22-CR-262-1
                      ______________________________

   Before King, Higginson, and Willett, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Elmer Alexander Martinez-Amaya appeals his conviction and
   sentence for illegal reentry after removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a)
   and (b)(1). In his sole issue on appeal, Martinez-Amaya contends that
   § 1326(b) is unconstitutional because it permits a sentence above the

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-50859      Document: 00516696919          Page: 2    Date Filed: 03/31/2023

                                    No. 22-50859

   otherwise-applicable statutory maximum based on facts that were neither
   alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
          He has filed an unopposed motion for summary disposition and a
   letter brief explaining that he has raised this issue only to preserve it for
   further review and conceding that 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).          Because summary disposition is
   appropriate, see Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir.
   1969), Martinez-Amaya’s motion is GRANTED, and the district court’s
   judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                              2