Court Opinion

ID: 9929673
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-03 01:00:37.630578+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:43:12.412226
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-50631        Document: 00517054932             Page: 1      Date Filed: 02/02/2024

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 23-50631
                                    Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                    ____________                               February 2, 2024
                                                                                 Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                          Clerk

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Gabriel Gonzales-Landeros,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Western District of Texas
                              USDC No. 4:23-CR-143-1
                     ______________________________

   Before Jolly, Engelhardt, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Gabriel Gonzales-Landeros appeals his conviction and sentence for
   illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). Gonzales-Landeros
   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

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-50631     Document: 00517054932         Page: 2   Date Filed: 02/02/2024

                                  No. 23-50631

   facts that are neither alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury beyond
   a reasonable doubt.    Although Gonzales-Landeros 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, Gonzales-Landeros 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, Gonzales-Landeros’s motion is GRANTED, and the
   judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                       2