United States of America v. JORGE ALDEA also known as FAT GEORGE Jorge Aldea

NOT PRECEDENTIAL
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT
OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
NO. 06-4413
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
JORGE ALDEA
also known as
FAT GEORGE
Jorge Aldea
Appellant
On Appeal From the United States
District Court
For the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
(D.C. Crim. Action No. 03-cr-00014-2)
District Judge: Hon. Stewart Dalzell
Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
January 11, 2008
BEFORE: FISHER, HARDIMAN and
STAPLETON, Circuit Judges
(Opinion Filed January 15, 2008 )

-- 1 of 3 --

2
OPINION OF THE COURT
STAPLETON, Circuit Judge:
Appellant Jorge Aldea was convicted by a jury of conspiracy to distribute in excess
of five kilograms of cocaine. The District Court found that he conspired to distribute
over 150 kilograms of cocaine and sentenced Aldea pursuant to the then mandatory
Sentencing Guidelines to 280 months of incarceration. On appeal, with Blakely and
Booker having been decided in the interim, we affirmed Aldea’s conviction but remanded
for resentencing. We ruled as follows:
Jorge Aldea argues that his sentence of 280 months exceeded the maximum
possible sentence supported by the jury verdict and, thus, violates Blakely v.
Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004), and United States v. Booker, 543 U.S.
220 (2005). He also argues that, because he committed his offense before
the Supreme Court decided Booker, the Ex Post Facto clause prevents
imposition of a sentence that includes any enhancement. Having
determined that Booker issues are best resolved by the District Court in the
first instance, we will vacate his sentence and remand for resentencing in
accordance with that opinion. (Citations omitted.)
United States v. Jorge Aldea, No. 04-2305, Slip Opinion at 14-15 (Not Precedential).
On remand, the District Court rejected Aldea’s argument that imposition of a
sentence greater than 151 months of incarceration would be unlawful and sentenced him
to 240 months. This appeal followed.

-- 2 of 3 --

3
Aldea insists that the District Court’s 240 month sentence violated his Due Process
right to protection from an ex post facto increase in punishment. Aldea candidly
acknowledges, however, that we have held to the contrary in United States v. Pennavaria,
445 F.3d 720 (3d Cir. 2006), and explains that he is pursuing this appeal in order to be in
a position to seek review in the Supreme Court of the United States.
Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court will be affirmed.

-- 3 of 3 --