Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Miguel Alexander Villeda-Escobar raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. *378§ 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
224 F. App'x 377
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel Alexander VILLEDA-ESCOBAR, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-40785
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
April 4, 2007.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Tony Ray Roberts, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Michael L. Herman, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and HIGGINBOTHAM and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
United States v. Villeda-Escobar
224 F. App'x 377
Case Details
224 F. App'x 377
References
Nothing yet... Still searching!
Nothing yet... Still searching!