United States v. Galvan-Sanchez
This text of United States v. Galvan-Sanchez (United States v. Galvan-Sanchez) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D April 24, 2003 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
No. 02-20906 Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ROMAN GALVAN-SANCHEZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-02-CR-51-1 --------------------
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Roman Galvan-Sanchez pleaded guilty to illegal reentry to
the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 following
deportation subsequent to an aggravated felony conviction.
Galvan-Sanchez argues that his prior felony conviction for
possession of a controlled substance did not merit the eight-
level adjustment provided in U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C) for an
aggravated felony. He argues that he should have received only
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. No. 02-20906 -2-
the four-level adjustment provided in U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(D)
for “any other felony.” Galvan-Sanchez concedes that his
argument is foreclosed by United States v. Caicedo-Cuero, 312
F.3d 697, 706-11 (5th Cir. 2002), petition for cert. filed, (U.S.
March 19, 2003)(No. 02-9747), but raises the argument to preserve
it for Supreme Court review. Because Caicedo-Cuero is still good
law and one panel of this court cannot overrule another absent
superceding Supreme Court or en banc authority, Galvan-Sanchez’s
argument is foreclosed. See United States v. Ruff, 984 F.2d 635,
640 (5th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, the district court did not err
in assessing an eight-level adjustment to Galvan-Sanchez’s
sentencing guideline calculation.
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Galvan-Sanchez, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-galvan-sanchez-ca5-2003.