United States v. Reyes-Najera

168 F. App'x 616
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided February 23, 2006·No. 05-40965·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Juan Rangel-Reyes (Rangel) appeals his conviction and sentence for illegal reentry, raising a constitutional challenge to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (2). We do not reach the applicability of the sentencing waiver because Rangel’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Although Rangel contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres 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 AlmendarezTorres 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). Rangel properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres 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Pursuant to 5th Cir R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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

United States v. Reyes-Najera, 168 F. App'x 616 (5th Cir. 2006).

168 F. App'x 616 (United States v. Reyes-Najera) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Almendarez-Torres v. United States
523 U.S. 224 (Supreme Court, 1998)
Apprendi v. New Jersey
530 U.S. 466 (Supreme Court, 2000)
United States v. Oscar Garza-Lopez
410 F.3d 268 (Fifth Circuit, 2005)
Llerena v. United States
546 U.S. 919 (Supreme Court, 2005)