Court Opinion

ID: 9957925
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-05 18:00:47.422662+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:17:33.155475
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-50547            Document: 48-1         Page: 1      Date Filed: 04/05/2024

           United States Court of Appeals
                for the Fifth Circuit
                                   ____________
                                                                             United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                      Fifth Circuit
                                    No. 23-50547
                                  Summary Calendar                                   FILED
                                  ____________                                     April 5, 2024
                                                                               Lyle W. Cayce
United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                    Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                          versus

Jose Domingo Carranza-Rubio,

                                            Defendant—Appellant.
                   ______________________________

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Western District of Texas
                            USDC No. 2:21-CR-1423-1
                   ______________________________

Before Smith, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
       Jose Domingo Carranza-Rubio appeals his conviction for illegal
reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). He asserts for the first time on appeal that
the statutory sentencing enhancement in § 1326(b) is unconstitutional,
although he concedes that the issue is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v.

       _____________________
       *
           This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-50547       Document: 48-1       Page: 2    Date Filed: 04/05/2024

                                 No. 23-50547

United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998). He thus moves for summary disposition
of the appeal.
       Because Carranza-Rubio’s argument is foreclosed, see United States v.
Pervis, 937 F.3d 546, 553-54 (5th Cir. 2019), summary disposition is
appropriate, see Groendyke Transp. Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir.
1969). The motion is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.

                                      2