Court Opinion

ID: 9388019
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-19 18:00:41.934471+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:17.002692
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-50810        Document: 00516717528             Page: 1      Date Filed: 04/19/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 22-50810
                                    Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                    ____________                                  April 19, 2023
                                                                                 Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                          Clerk

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Alvaro Pacheco-Derma,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Western District of Texas
                              USDC No. 4:22-CR-234-1
                     ______________________________

   Before Higginbotham, Graves, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Alvaro Pacheco-Derma appeals his conviction and sentence for illegal
   reentry into the United States under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(1). For the
   first time on appeal, 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

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-50810     Document: 00516717528           Page: 2   Date Filed: 04/19/2023

                                    No. 22-50810

   are neither alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable
   doubt. While Pacheco-Derma 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. In addition, Pacheco-
   Derma 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, Pacheco-Derma 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).
          Pacheco-Derma’s motion is GRANTED, and the district court’s
   judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                             2