Court Opinion

ID: 9384162
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-01 00:00:31.886121+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:51.031946
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-50914         Document: 00516697275             Page: 1      Date Filed: 03/31/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 22-50914
                                     Summary Calendar                                 FILED
                                     ____________                                March 31, 2023
                                                                                 Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                          Clerk

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   J Reyes-Carrillo,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                           for the Western District of Texas
                               USDC No. 4:22-CR-312-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Stewart, Dennis, and Willett, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          J Reyes-Carrillo appeals his guilty plea conviction and sentence for
   illegal reentry after removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). He
   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

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-50914      Document: 00516697275          Page: 2   Date Filed: 03/31/2023

                                    No. 22-50914

   the indictment nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. Reyes-Carrillo
   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). Reyes-Carrillo 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, Reyes-Carrillo’s motion for summary disposition is
   GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

                                             2