Court Opinion

ID: 9403399
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-21 00:00:29.564625+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:06.665397
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-50907         Document: 00516792934             Page: 1      Date Filed: 06/20/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 22-50907
                                     Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                     ____________                                  June 20, 2023
                                                                                  Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Simon Mendez-Alvarez,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                           for the Western District of Texas
                               USDC No. 4:22-CR-205-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Davis, Duncan, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Simon Mendez-Alvarez appeals his concurrent sentences for visa
   fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1546, and illegal reentry into the United States under
   8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). Mendez-Alvarez argues that the recidivism
   enhancement in § 1326(b) is unconstitutional because it permits a sentence
   above the applicable maximum in § 1326(a), based on facts neither alleged in

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-50907      Document: 00516792934          Page: 2   Date Filed: 06/20/2023

                                    No. 22-50907

   the indictment nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. Mendez-
   Alvarez acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres
   v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but he nevertheless seeks to preserve it
   for possible Supreme Court review. Accordingly, Mendez-Alvarez has filed
   an unopposed motion for summary disposition.
          We have 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). As Mendez-Alvarez concedes
   that his argument is foreclosed, summary disposition is appropriate. See
   Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969).
          Mendez-Alvarez’s motion is GRANTED, and the district court’s
   judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                             2