United States v. Aguilar-Lara

215 F. App'x 389
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided February 7, 2007·No. 06-40855·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Esthela Aguilar-Lara raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 528 U.S. 224, 285, 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; and by United States v. Carmichael, 343 F.3d 756, 761-62 (5th Cir. 2003), which held that a challenge to the district court’s order requiring the defendant to cooperate in the collection of a DNA sample as a condition of supervised release is not ripe for review on direct appeal. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED.

JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; APPEAL DISMISSED IN PART.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Aguilar-Lara, 215 F. App'x 389 (5th Cir. 2007).

215 F. App'x 389 (United States v. Aguilar-Lara) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Carmichael
343 F.3d 756 (Fifth Circuit, 2003)
Almendarez-Torres v. United States
523 U.S. 224 (Supreme Court, 1998)
Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Slater
528 U.S. 216 (Supreme Court, 2000)