Court Opinion

ID: 9839651
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-13 18:01:04.309223+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:38:54.634657
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-50253         Document: 00516893542             Page: 1      Date Filed: 09/13/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                     _____________
                                                                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 23-50253
                                  consolidated with                                    FILED
                                      No. 23-50256                            September 13, 2023
                                    _____________                                 Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                       Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Alberto Acosta-Estrella,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                     Appeals from the United States District Court
                          for the Western District of Texas
                      USDC Nos. 4:16-CR-91-4, 4:22-CR-749-1
                     ______________________________

   Before Davis, Haynes, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Alberto Acosta-Estrella appeals his guilty plea conviction and
   sentence for illegal reentry after removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a)
   and (b)(2), as well as the revocation of his supervised release and the sentence
   imposed upon revocation. He does not raise any arguments concerning the

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-50253      Document: 00516893542         Page: 2    Date Filed: 09/13/2023

                                    No. 23-50253
                                  c/w No. 23-50256

   revocation, meaning that any challenge on that basis is abandoned on appeal.
   See United States v. Reagan, 596 F.3d 251, 254-55 (5th Cir. 2010).
          Acosta-Estrella 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
   are neither alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable
   doubt. He acknowledges that this 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, he 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). Acosta-Estrella is, therefore,
   correct that his argument is foreclosed. Because his position “is clearly right
   as a matter of law so that there can be no substantial question as to the
   outcome of the case,” summary disposition is proper. Groendyke Transp.,
   Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969).
          Accordingly, Acosta-Estrella’s motion for summary disposition is
   GRANTED, and the judgments of the district court are AFFIRMED.

                                          2