United States v. Baez-Martinez

268 F. App'x 323
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided March 5, 2008·No. 07-40884·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Santiago Baez-Martinez 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. Pinedas-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir.2007), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 128 S.Ct. 872, 169 L.Ed.2d 737 (2008). The appellant’s motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.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. Baez-Martinez, 268 F. App'x 323 (5th Cir. 2008).

268 F. App'x 323 (United States v. Baez-Martinez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Pineda-Arrellano
492 F.3d 624 (Fifth Circuit, 2007)
Almendarez-Torres v. United States
523 U.S. 224 (Supreme Court, 1998)
Summage v. United States
128 S. Ct. 875 (Supreme Court, 2008)