Court Opinion

ID: 35856
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 19:33:33+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:40:29.666153
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                                                                 Fifth Circuit

                                                             FILED
               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS        June 23, 2004
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                                                       Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                               Clerk

                            No. 03-51241
                        Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                    Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE MARIA BUITRON-GARCIA,

                                    Defendant-Appellant.

                       --------------------
          Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Western District of Texas
                      USDC No. P-03-CR-128-1
                       --------------------

Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Jose Maria Buitron-Garcia appeals his guilty plea conviction

for possession with intent to distribute 100 kilograms or more,

but not less than 1,000 kilograms, of marihuana.   He argues that

the sentencing provision of 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B) is

unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S.
466, 490 (2000).   Buitron-Garcia concedes that his argument is

foreclosed by our opinion in United States v. Slaughter, 238 F.3d

     *
        Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
                             No. 03-51241
                                  -2-

580, 581-82 (5th Cir. 2000).    He raises the issue only to

preserve it for Supreme Court review.

     A panel of this court cannot overrule a prior panel’s

decision in the absence of an intervening contrary or superseding

decision by this court sitting en banc or by the United States

Supreme Court.     Burge v. Parish of St. Tammany, 187 F.3d 452, 466

(5th Cir. 1999).    No such decision overruling Slaughter exists.

Accordingly, Buitron-Garcia’s argument is foreclosed, and the

judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

     The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief.    In its motion, the Government asks

that an appellee’s brief not be required.    The motion is GRANTED.

     AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.