Court Opinion

ID: 9945355
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-27 19:01:25.472779+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:25:28.176434
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-50670            Document: 43-1         Page: 1      Date Filed: 02/27/2024

           United States Court of Appeals
                for the Fifth Circuit
                                   ____________
                                                                             United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                      Fifth Circuit
                                    No. 23-50670
                                  Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                  ____________                               February 27, 2024
                                                                               Lyle W. Cayce
United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                    Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                          versus

Jorge Ortiz-Juarez,

                                            Defendant—Appellant.
                   ______________________________

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Western District of Texas
                            USDC No. 2:21-CR-928-1
                   ______________________________

Before Wiener, Stewart, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
       Jorge Ortiz-Juarez appeals his conviction and sentence for illegal
reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). Ortiz-Juarez argues for the first
time on appeal 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

       _____________________
       *
           This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-50670       Document: 43-1       Page: 2    Date Filed: 02/27/2024

                                 No. 23-50670

are neither alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable
doubt. Although Ortiz-Juarez 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, and he has filed an
unopposed motion for summary disposition.
       This court has 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). Thus, Ortiz-Juarez 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).
       Accordingly, Ortiz-Juarez’s motion is GRANTED, and the
judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                      2