Court Opinion

ID: 9889586
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-10 19:00:51.810865+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:50:02.148236
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-50393        Document: 00516925484             Page: 1      Date Filed: 10/10/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 23-50393
                                    Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                    ____________                               October 10, 2023
                                                                                 Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                          Clerk

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Ramiro Mondragon-Calderon,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Western District of Texas
                               USDC No. 1:23-CR-35-1
                     ______________________________

   Before Willett, Duncan, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Ramiro Mondragon-Calderon appeals his conviction and sentence for
   illegal reentry into the United States after removal. For the first time on
   appeal, Mondragon-Calderon contends that the recidivism enhancement in
   8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) is unconstitutional because it permits a sentence above
   the otherwise applicable statutory maximum established by § 1326(a) based

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-50393     Document: 00516925484           Page: 2   Date Filed: 10/10/2023

                                    No. 23-50393

   on facts that are neither alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury beyond
   a reasonable doubt. Although Mondragon-Calderon acknowledges that 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 and 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). Accordingly, Mondragon-
   Calderon 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).
          IT IS ORDERED that Mondragon-Calderon’s motion is
   GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                         2