Court Opinion

ID: 9890597
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-13 18:01:15.118764+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:50:02.593393
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-10474         Document: 00516930573             Page: 1      Date Filed: 10/13/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 23-10474
                                     Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                     ____________                               October 13, 2023
                                                                                  Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Juan Garcia-Bertadillo,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Northern District of Texas
                                USDC No. 3:22-CR-81-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Smith, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Juan Garcia-Bertadillo appeals the sentence for his conviction under
   8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2) for illegal reentry after removal. He contends
   that his sentence exceeds the statutory maximum and is therefore unconsti-
   tutional because the district court enhanced it under § 1326(b) based on the
   fact of a prior conviction that was not alleged in the indictment. He correctly
   concedes that his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United
          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-10474      Document: 00516930573            Page: 2    Date Filed: 10/13/2023

                                      No. 23-10474

   States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), and explains that he raises this issue to preserve
   it for further review. See United States v. Pervis, 937 F.3d 546, 553–54 (5th
   Cir. 2019). 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 motion for summary
   affirmance is GRANTED, and the alternative motion for an extension of
   time to file a brief is DENIED. The judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                           2