Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jorge Antonio Briceno-Dzib 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. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. United States v. Pinedar-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir.2007), petition for cert, filed (Aug. 28, 2007) (No. 07-6202). The appellant’s motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
249 F. App'x 373
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jorge Antonio BRICENO-DZIB, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 07-40445
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Oct. 3, 2007.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
United States v. Briceno-Dzib
249 F. App'x 373
Case Details
249 F. App'x 373
References
Nothing yet... Still searching!
Nothing yet... Still searching!