United States v. Vargas-Maldonado

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
• Decided: August 29, 2025
• Docket: 25-50058
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 25-50058 Document: 43-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/29/2025

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

FILED No. 25-50058 August 29, 2025 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Abel Vargas-Maldonado,

Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:24-CR-220-1 ______________________________

Before Wiener, Willett, and Wilson, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Defendant-Appellant Abel Vargas-Maldonado appeals his conviction for illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), contending for the first time on appeal that the statutory sentencing enhancement in § 1326(b) is unconstitutional. He concedes this argument is foreclosed by Almendarez- Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), and the Government has filed an

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 25-50058 Document: 43-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/29/2025

No. 25-50058

unopposed motion for summary affirmance or, alternatively, for an extension of time in which to file a brief. The argument is foreclosed. See United States v. Pervis, 937 F.3d 546, 553-54 (5th Cir. 2019); see also Erlinger v. United States, 602 U.S. 821, 838 (2024) (explaining 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)). Therefore, summary affirmance is appropriate. See Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969). Accordingly, the motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, the alternative motion for an extension of time is DENIED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.