Court Opinion

ID: 9956283
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-01 18:00:50.629862+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:15:46.965645
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-50819           Document: 43-1         Page: 1      Date Filed: 04/01/2024

          United States Court of Appeals
               for the Fifth Circuit
                                  ____________
                                                                            United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                     Fifth Circuit
                                   No. 23-50819
                                 Summary Calendar                                   FILED
                                 ____________                                     April 1, 2024
                                                                              Lyle W. Cayce
United States of America,                                                          Clerk

                                                                   Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                         versus

Luis Miguel Huerta-Pedraza,

                                           Defendant—Appellant.
                  ______________________________

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Western District of Texas
                           USDC No. 2:23-CR-1076-1
                  ______________________________

Before Jolly, Higginson, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
      Luis Miguel Huerta-Pedraza appeals his sentence for illegal reentry
into the United States under 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He 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
the indictment nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. As Huerta-

      _____________________
      *
          This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-50819       Document: 43-1       Page: 2    Date Filed: 04/01/2024

                                 No. 23-50819

Pedraza acknowledges, his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v.
United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but he seeks to preserve it for possible
Supreme Court review. Accordingly, Huerta-Pedraza 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 Huerta-Pedraza concedes
that his argument is foreclosed, summary disposition is appropriate. See
Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969).
       Huerta-Pedraza’s motion is GRANTED, and the district court’s
judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                      2