Court Opinion

ID: 9949991
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-13 00:00:38.930835+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:34:50.510045
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-50686           Document: 51-1         Page: 1      Date Filed: 03/12/2024

          United States Court of Appeals
               for the Fifth Circuit
                                 _____________
                                                                            United States Court of Appeals
                                  No. 23-50686                                       Fifth Circuit

                              consolidated with                                    FILED
                                  No. 23-50689                               March 12, 2024
                                Summary Calendar                              Lyle W. Cayce
                                _____________                                      Clerk

United States of America,

                                                                   Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                         versus

Felipe Matias-Miguel,

                                           Defendant—Appellant.
                  ______________________________

                  Appeals from the United States District Court
                       for the Western District of Texas
                           USDC Nos. 4:23-CR-178-1,
                                 4:22-CR-229-1
                  ______________________________

Before Elrod, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
      Felipe Matias-Miguel appeals following his conviction for illegal
reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) as well as the revocation of a
previously imposed term of supervised release, arguing for the first time on

      _____________________
      *
          This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-50686      Document: 51-1      Page: 2   Date Filed: 03/12/2024

                                 23-50686
                             c/w No. 23-50689

appeal that the statutory sentencing enhancement in § 1326(b) is
unconstitutional. He concedes this argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-
Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), and has filed an unopposed
motion for summary disposition.
      Because the argument is foreclosed, see United States v. Pervis, 937
F.3d 546, 553-54 (5th Cir. 2019), summary disposition is appropriate, see
Groendyke Transp. Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969).
Accordingly, the motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and the
judgments of the district court are AFFIRMED.

                                    2