From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Avelar-Castro

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Feb 24, 2016
637 F. App'x 177 (5th Cir. 2016)

Summary

affirming district court's ruling that "even if . . . a Fourth Amendment violation occurred, evidence establishing Avelar's guilt (evidence of his identity), is not suppressive."

Summary of this case from United States v. Lara-Hidalgo

Opinion

No. 15-30327

02-24-2016

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee v. MELVIN JOSUE AVELAR-CASTRO, Defendant - Appellant


Summary Calendar Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 2:14-CR-61-1 Before BARKSDALE, CLEMENT, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. --------

Melvin Josue Avelar-Castro entered a conditional guilty plea (he reserved his right to challenge the denial of his motion to dismiss the indictment) to illegally reentering the United States following deportation subsequent to a felony conviction, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. In challenging the denial of his motion to dismiss the indictment, Avelar contends he was deprived of his roommate's testimony that officers entered their residence without his roommate's consent because he was deported before Avelar was indicted.

Citing United States v. Roque-Villanueva, the court ruled that even if, arguendo, a Fourth Amendment violation occurred, evidence establishing Avelar's guilt (evidence of his identity), is not suppressible. 175 F.3d 345, 346 (5th Cir. 1999); United States v. Pineda-Chinchilla, 712 F.2d 942, 943-44 (5th Cir. 1983) (holding defendant lacked standing to challenge the admissibility of his Alien File).

Avelar maintains Roque-Villanueva was wrongly decided. He also asserts Pineda-Chinchilla violates the rule of orderliness because earlier case law permitted defendants to challenge the admissibility of evidence despite lacking a possessory or privacy interest. One panel of this court may not overrule the decision of another panel in the absence of an intervening change in law or contrary or superseding decision by this court sitting en banc or by the United States Supreme Court. United States v. Traxler, 764 F.3d 486, 489 (5th Cir. 2014). Therefore, Roque-Villanueva is binding precedent. Id.; 175 F.3d at 346.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

United States v. Avelar-Castro

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Feb 24, 2016
637 F. App'x 177 (5th Cir. 2016)

affirming district court's ruling that "even if . . . a Fourth Amendment violation occurred, evidence establishing Avelar's guilt (evidence of his identity), is not suppressive."

Summary of this case from United States v. Lara-Hidalgo
Case details for

United States v. Avelar-Castro

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee v. MELVIN JOSUE…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Feb 24, 2016

Citations

637 F. App'x 177 (5th Cir. 2016)

Citing Cases

United States v. White

Even by White's own analysis, his decision to plead at the state level and the resulting ill effects of that…

United States v. Lara-Hidalgo

But the Court notes that the Fifth Circuit and other courts within it have construed Roque-Villanueva to be a…