Court Opinion

ID: 9380938
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-21 18:00:42.524168+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:28.938867
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-10586        Document: 00516683200             Page: 1      Date Filed: 03/21/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 22-10586
                                    Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                    ____________                                March 21, 2023
                                                                                 Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                          Clerk

                                                                     Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Carlos Delgado-Adame,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Northern District of Texas
                               USDC No. 4:22-CR-18-1
                     ______________________________

   Before King, Higginson, and Willett, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Carlos Delgado-Adame appeals his conviction and 60-month sentence
   for illegal reentry after having been previously removed, in violation of 8
   U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(1). He argues that it is a violation of the Sixth
   Amendment’s Notice Clause to treat a prior conviction that increases the
   statutory maximum under § 1326(b) as a sentencing factor, rather than as an

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-10586      Document: 00516683200            Page: 2    Date Filed: 03/21/2023

                                      No. 22-10586

   element of the offense. Delgado-Adame concedes that Almendarez-Torres v.
   United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), forecloses this argument, but he wishes
   to preserve it for further review. The Government has moved for summary
   affirmance or, alternatively, for an extension of time to file its brief.
          As the Government asserts and as Delgado-Adame concedes, the sole
   issue raised on appeal is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres. See United States
   v. Pervis, 937 F.3d 546, 553-54 (5th Cir. 2019); United States v. Wallace, 759
   F.3d 486, 497 (5th Cir. 2014). Because the Government’s position “is clearly
   right as a matter of law so that there can be no substantial question as to the
   outcome of the case,” Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162
   (5th Cir. 1969), summary affirmance is proper.
          Accordingly, the motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and
   the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The Government’s
   alternative motion for an extension of time is DENIED as moot.

                                           2