United States v. Morales-Agustine
United States v. Morales-Agustine
Opinion
Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jesus Francisco Morales-Agustine (Morales) argues that the enhancement provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are unconstitutional. To the extent his arguments may be raised in this appeal following remand, Un ited States v. Matthews, 312 F.3d 652, 657 (5th Cir. 2002), Morales’s arguments 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. The appellant’s motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.