Court Opinion

ID: 9929672
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-03 01:00:37.119585+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:43:16.830694
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-50576        Document: 00517054311             Page: 1      Date Filed: 02/02/2024

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 23-50576
                                    Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                    ____________                               February 2, 2024
                                                                                 Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                          Clerk

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Julio Cesar Guzman-Avila,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Western District of Texas
                              USDC No. 2:21-CR-1564-1
                     ______________________________

   Before Jones, Southwick, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Julio Cesar Guzman-Avila appeals his conviction and sentence for
   illegal re-entry into the United States under 8 U.S.C. § 1326. For the first
   time on appeal, he argues that the recidivism enhancement in § 1326(b) is
   unconstitutional because it permits a sentence above the otherwise-
   applicable statutory maximum established by § 1326(a), based on facts that

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-50576     Document: 00517054311           Page: 2   Date Filed: 02/02/2024

                                    No. 23-50576

   are neither alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable
   doubt. While Guzman-Avila acknowledges 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. In addition, Guzman-
   Avila has filed an unopposed motion for summary disposition.
          This court has 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). Thus, Guzman-Avila 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).
          Guzman-Avila’s motion is GRANTED, and the district court’s
   judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                         2