United States v. Enriquez-Guevara
Opinion
Lorenzo Zuniga-Enriquez (Zuniga) appeals his illegal reentry conviction and sentence, challenging the constitutionality of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (2). Zuniga’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 *492 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Although Zuniga contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule AlmendarezTorres in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding. See United States v. Garza-Lopez, 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 298, 163 L.Ed.2d 260 (2005). Zuniga properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of AlmendarezTorres and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review.
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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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
186 F. App'x 491 (United States v. Enriquez-Guevara) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.