19-50827•United States v. Morales-Mercado
19-50827United States Court Of Appeals For The 5th Circuit19 de mar. de 2020
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-50827
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
JOSE RICARDO MORALES-MERCADO,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 3:19-CR-188-1
Before STEWART, HIGGINSON, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
*
Jose Ricardo Morales-Mercado appeals the 51-month sentence imposed
following his guilty plea conviction for being found unlawfully present in the
United States after previous deportation. He argues that his sentence was
imposed under an unconstitutional statute, 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b). Specifically, he
contends that in order to trigger a sentencing enhancement under § 1326(b),
the fact of a prior conviction must be alleged in the indictment and proven to a
*
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5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
March 19, 2020
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
Case: 19-50827 Document: 00515351605 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/19/2020
No. 19-50827
2
jury; therefore, he asserts that § 1326(b) is unconstitutional. He correctly
concedes that his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United
States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but raises the issue to preserve for further possible
review. See United States v. Wallace, 759 F.3d 486, 497 (5th Cir. 2014); United
States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625-26 (5th Cir. 2007).
The Government has filed an unopposed motion for summary affirmance
and, alternatively, seeks an extension of time to file its brief. Because the issue
is foreclosed, summary affirmance is appropriate. See Groendyke Transp., Inc.
v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969).
Accordingly, the Government’s motion for summary affirmance is
GRANTED, the Government’s alternative motion for an extension of time to
file a brief is DENIED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Case: 19-50827 Document: 00515351605 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/19/2020
Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.