Court Opinion

ID: 9391362
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-02 00:00:28.103556+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:41.623214
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-50991         Document: 00516733489             Page: 1      Date Filed: 05/01/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                     _____________
                                                                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 22-50991
                                  consolidated with                                    FILED
                                      No. 22-51010                                    May 1, 2023
                                    _____________                                 Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                       Clerk
   United States of America,

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Rodolfo Hernandez Roman,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                           for the Western District of Texas
                              USDC Nos. 4:22-CR-528-1,
                                    4:22-CR-242-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Davis, Smith, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Rodolfo Hernandez Roman appeals his sentence for illegal reentry
   after removal, as well as the judgment revoking his term of supervised release
   for committing the new offense. He has not briefed, and has therefore
   abandoned, any challenge to the revocation of supervised release or his

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-50991       Document: 00516733489        Page: 2    Date Filed: 05/01/2023

                                       22-50991
                                   c/w No. 22-51010

   revocation sentence. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir.
   1993).
            For the first time on appeal, Hernandez Roman argues that his
   sentence exceeds the statutory maximum and is therefore unconstitutional
   because the district court enhanced his sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)
   based on facts that were neither alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury
   beyond a reasonable doubt.       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.
   Accordingly, Hernandez Roman has filed an unopposed motion for summary
   disposition.
            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, Hernandez Roman 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).
            Hernandez Roman’s motion is GRANTED, and the district court’s
   judgments are AFFIRMED.

                                              2