Court Opinion

ID: 9392071
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-04 00:00:28.471409+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:08.017386
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-50943         Document: 00516736979             Page: 1      Date Filed: 05/03/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________                              United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit

                                       No. 22-50943
                                                                                       FILED
                                                                                      May 3, 2023
                                     Summary Calendar
                                     ____________                                 Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                       Clerk
   United States of America,

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Ambrosio Nolasco-Ariza,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                           for the Western District of Texas
                               USDC No. 1:21-CR-234-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Davis, Duncan, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Ambrosio Nolasco-Ariza appeals his conviction for illegal reentry into
   the United States after having been removed, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.
   He contends that § 1326 violates the Fifth Amendment’s equal protection
   principles. He concedes that this argument is foreclosed by our recent
   decision in United States v. Barcenas-Rumualdo, 53 F.4th 859, 862 (5th

         _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-50943      Document: 00516736979            Page: 2   Date Filed: 05/03/2023

                                      No. 22-50943

   Cir. 2022), and merely raises this issue to preserve it for further review. The
   Government has moved without opposition for summary affirmance, or,
   alternatively, for an extension of time to file a brief.
          Because summary affirmance is appropriate, see Groendyke Transp.,
   Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969), the Government’s motion
   for summary affirmance is GRANTED, the Government’s alternative
   motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the district
   court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                                2