Court Opinion

ID: 9908770
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-11 19:00:36.294602+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:49:30.941930
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-10293        Document: 00516996327             Page: 1      Date Filed: 12/11/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 23-10293
                                    Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                    ____________                              December 11, 2023
                                                                                 Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                          Clerk

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Ricardo Fortino Martinez-Munoz,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Northern District of Texas
                              USDC No. 4:22-CR-296-1
                     ______________________________

   Before Higginbotham, Stewart, and Southwick, Circuit
   Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Ricardo Fortino Martinez-Munoz appeals the sentence imposed
   following his conviction under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(1) for illegal
   reentry after deportation. Martinez-Munoz argues that his sentence exceeds
   the statutory maximum and is thus unconstitutional because the district court
   applied the § 1326(b) enhancement based on the fact of a prior conviction
          _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-10293      Document: 00516996327          Page: 2   Date Filed: 12/11/2023

                                    No. 23-10293

   that was neither alleged in the indictment nor admitted by him at
   rearraignment. He correctly concedes that his argument is foreclosed by
   Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), and he raises this
   issue to preserve it for further review. See United States v. Pervis, 937 F.3d
   546, 553-54 (5th Cir. 2019). The Government moves, without opposition,
   for summary affirmance, or, alternatively, for an extension of time to file a
   brief.
            Because summary affirmance is appropriate, see Groendyke Transp.,
   Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969), the motion for summary
   affirmance is GRANTED, and the alternative motion for an extension of
   time to file a brief is DENIED. The judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                         2