United States v. Bejarano

19-50521United States Court Of Appeals For The 5th Circuit21.01.2020

Gesamter Gesetzestext

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-50521
Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

PABLO URIAS BEJARANO,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 4:18-CR-699-1

Before STEWART, HIGGINSON, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
*

Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Pablo Urias Bejarano
contends that a prior aggravated felony conviction is an element of the offense
under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) that must be alleged in the indictment and
admitted by the defendant or found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. As
he concedes, the issue is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523
U.S. 224 (1998).

*
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5
TH
CIR. R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
January 21, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
Case: 19-50521 Document: 00515278845 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/21/2020

No. 19-50521
2
In Almendarez-Torres, 523 U.S. at 239-47, the Supreme Court held that
for purposes of a statutory sentencing enhancement, a prior conviction is not a
fact that must be alleged in an indictment or found by a jury beyond a
reasonable doubt. This court has held that subsequent Supreme Court
decisions did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See United States v. Wallace,
759 F.3d 486, 497 (5th Cir. 2014) (considering the effect of Alleyne v. United
States, 570 U.S. 99 (2013)); United States v. Rojas-Luna, 522 F.3d 502, 505-06
(5th Cir. 2008) (considering the effect of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466
(2000)).
The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, see
Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969), and the
judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The Government’s alternative
motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED as moot.
Case: 19-50521 Document: 00515278845 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/21/2020

Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort

Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.