Court Opinion

ID: 9909331
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-13 01:00:31.618068+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:49:05.545762
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-50306         Document: 00516999024             Page: 1      Date Filed: 12/12/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 23-50306
                                     Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                     ____________                              December 12, 2023
                                                                                  Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Melvin Rolando-Padilla,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                           for the Western District of Texas
                               USDC No. 2:22-CR-1151-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Davis, Haynes, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Melvin Rolando-Padilla appeals the sentence imposed following his
   conviction for illegal reentry into the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C.
   § 1326(a). He contends for the first time on appeal that the sentencing
   enhancement in § 1326(b) is unconstitutional because it permits a sentence
   above the otherwise applicable statutory maximum established by § 1326(a)

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-50306      Document: 00516999024          Page: 2   Date Filed: 12/12/2023

                                    No. 23-50306

   based on facts that are neither alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury
   beyond a reasonable doubt. Rolando-Padilla has filed an unopposed motion
   for summary disposition acknowledging that this argument is foreclosed by
   Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), and explaining that
   he seeks to preserve it for possible Supreme Court review.
          We have 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). Rolando-Padilla is, therefore,
   correct that his argument is foreclosed. Accordingly, because summary
   disposition is appropriate, see Groendyke Transp. Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158,
   1162 (5th Cir. 1969), the motion is GRANTED, and the district court’s
   judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                         2