From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Ortiz-Benavides

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Sep 6, 2007
239 F. App'x 910 (5th Cir. 2007)

Opinion

No. 06-51699 Conference Calendar.

September 6, 2007.

Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney's Office Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Judy Fulmer Madewell, Federal Public Defender's Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, USDC No. 5:06-CR-292-ALL.

Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.


Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Pedro Ortiz-Benavides raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres 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. See United States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir. 2007). The Government's motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Ortiz-Benavides

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Sep 6, 2007
239 F. App'x 910 (5th Cir. 2007)
Case details for

U.S. v. Ortiz-Benavides

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Pedro ORTIZ-BENAVIDES…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Sep 6, 2007

Citations

239 F. App'x 910 (5th Cir. 2007)

Citing Cases

Watson v. Harris

No supplemental petition having been filed setting forth any excuse for not bringing suit earlier, limitation…

Summerhill v. Darrow

This "conclusion" stands alone as a mere conclusion, unsupported by one word of competent evidence to prove…