United States v. Perez-Gonzalez

268 F. App'x 331
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Perez-Gonzalez. Read the opinion of the Court — 294 F. App'x 854
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided March 5, 2008·No. 07-51296·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Antero Perez-Gonzalez 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. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir.2007), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 128 S.Ct. 872, 169 L.Ed.2d 737 (2008). The judgment of *332 the district court is AFFIRMED. The Government’s motion for summary affir-mance, which relies on inapposite authority, is DENIED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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. Perez-Gonzalez, 268 F. App'x 331 (5th Cir. 2008).

268 F. App'x 331 (United States v. Perez-Gonzalez) — 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)