Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Ismael Rosas-Fortis raises arguments that are foreclosed by AlmendarezTorres 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. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. United States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir.2007), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 128 S.Ct. 872, *327169 L.Ed.2d 737 (2008). The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
268 F. App'x 326
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Ismael ROSAS-FORTIS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 07-51126
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
March 5, 2008.
Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Federal Public Defender’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before KING, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
United States v. Rosas-Fortis
268 F. App'x 326
Case Details
268 F. App'x 326
References
Nothing yet... Still searching!
Nothing yet... Still searching!