Court Opinion

ID: 9368324
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-03 19:00:38.534582+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:07.068007
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-50630        Document: 00516633824             Page: 1      Date Filed: 02/03/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________
                                                                              United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                       Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 22-50630
                                    Summary Calendar                                 FILED
                                    ____________                               February 3, 2023
                                                                                Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                         Clerk

                                                                     Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Gilberto Marquez-Calzadilla,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Western District of Texas
                               USDC No. 4:22-CR-99-1
                     ______________________________

   Before Davis, Smith, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Gilberto Marquez-Calzadilla appeals his sentence for illegal reentry in
   violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). For the first time on appeal, he
   contends that his sentence is unconstitutional because the district court
   enhanced his sentence under § 1326(b) based on facts that were neither
   alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-50630      Document: 00516633824          Page: 2   Date Filed: 02/03/2023

                                    No. 22-50630

   While he acknowledges this argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v.
   United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), he nevertheless seeks to preserve it for
   possible Supreme Court review. As such, Marquez-Calzadilla has filed an
   unopposed motion for summary disposition. See United State v. Pervis, 937
   F.3d 546, 553-54 (5th Cir. 2019).
          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). Thus, Marquez-Calzadilla is correct that his argument is
   foreclosed, and summary disposition is appropriate. See Groendyke Transp.,
   Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969).
          Marquez-Calzadilla’s motion is GRANTED, and the district court’s
   judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                          2