United States v. Macias-Ordonez

Opinion

Case: 25-10586 Document: 45-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/15/2025

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals ____________ Fifth Circuit

FILED No. 25-10586 October 15, 2025 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Hugo Ivan Macias-Ordonez,

Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:25-CR-1-1 ______________________________

Before Smith, Higginson, and Wilson, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Hugo Ivan Macias-Ordonez appeals following his conviction for illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), arguing that the enhanced penalty range in § 1326(b) is unconstitutional. As he correctly acknowledges, this issue is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998); see also Erlinger v. United States, 602 U.S. 821, 838 (2024) (stating

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 25-10586 Document: 45-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/15/2025

No. 25-10586

that Almendarez-Torres “persists as a narrow exception permitting judges to find only the fact of a prior conviction” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)). The Government has filed an unopposed motion for summary affirmance or, alternatively, for an extension of time to file a brief. Summary affirmance is appropriate here under Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969) (explaining that in circumstances where one party is clearly right as a matter of law, summary disposition is proper.) The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED. The Government’s alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.