U.S. v. ESPINOZA-MEDRANO, 235 Fed.Appx. 297 (5th Cir. 2007)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Ricardo ESPINOZA-MEDRANO, also known as Ricardo Montalvo-Medrano, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-41479, Conference Calendar.United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
August 8, 2007.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendants-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, USDC No. 5:06-CR-140-ALL.

Before DENNIS, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

Page 298

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Ricardo Espinoza-Medrano raises arguments that are foreclosed b 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. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.