United States v. Ramos-Lucas
Opinion
Antonio Ramos-Lucas (“Ramos”) appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for illegal reentry after deportation. He argues that the “felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), and that his sentence is improper under Blakely v. Washington, — U.S.-, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004). These arguments are, as he concedes, foreclosed. See Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998); United States v. Pineiro, 377 F.3d 464, 465-66 (5th Cir.2004), petition for cert. filed (U.S. July 14, 2004) (No. 04-5263); United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir.2000). Ramos’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
115 F. App'x 733 (United States v. Ramos-Lucas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.