Court Opinion

ID: 9375317
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-27 16:00:42.842275+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:58.340192
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-50806        Document: 00516654201             Page: 1      Date Filed: 02/23/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________
                                                                              United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                       Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 22-50806
                                    Summary Calendar                                 FILED
                                    ____________                              February 23, 2023
                                                                                Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                         Clerk

                                                                     Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Crisoforo Velazquez,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Western District of Texas
                              USDC No. 4:22-CR-155-1
                     ______________________________

   Before Smith, Southwick, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Crisoforo Velazquez appeals his sentence for illegal reentry under 8
   U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2), arguing that § 1326(b) is unconstitutional
   because it permits a sentence above the otherwise-applicable statutory
   maximum based on facts not charged or proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
   He has filed an unopposed motion for summary affirmance, conceding that

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-50806      Document: 00516654201          Page: 2    Date Filed: 02/23/2023

                                    No. 22-50806

   his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S.
   224 (1998), and explaining that he seeks only to preserve it for further review.
          Because Velazquez is correct in conceding that his argument is
   foreclosed, see United States v. Pervis, 937 F.3d 546, 553-54 (5th Cir. 2019),
   summary affirmance is appropriate, see Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406
   F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969). Accordingly, his motion is GRANTED, and
   the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

                                          2