Court Opinion

ID: 9905738
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-30 01:02:37.439203+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:23:52.593335
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-10581         Document: 00516983160             Page: 1      Date Filed: 11/29/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 23-10581
                                     Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                     ____________                              November 29, 2023
                                                                                  Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Ariel Perez-Lainez,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Northern District of Texas
                               USDC No. 4:22-CR-349-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Elrod, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Ariel Perez-Lainez appeals his sentence for illegal reentry under
   8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(1), arguing that the enhancement of his sentence
   under § 1326(b) is unconstitutional because it is based on facts not alleged in
   the indictment and neither admitted nor proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
   He concedes this argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-10581         Document: 00516983160          Page: 2   Date Filed: 11/29/2023

                                       No. 23-10581

   States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but explains that he wishes to preserve it for
   further review.       The Government has filed an unopposed motion for
   summary affirmance or, alternatively, for an extension of time in which to file
   a brief.
              Because Perez-Lainez is correct that his argument is foreclosed, see
   United States v. Pervis, 937 F.3d 546, 553–54 (5th Cir. 2019), summary
   affirmance is appropriate, see Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158,
   1162 (5th Cir. 1969). Accordingly, the Government’s motion for summary
   affirmance is GRANTED, its alternative motion for an extension of time is
   DENIED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

                                            2