United States v. Sanchez-Quintero

Case: 21-50835 Document: 00516225481 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/04/2022

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED March 4, 2022 No. 21-50835 Lyle W. Cayce consolidated with Clerk No. 21-50847

Summary Calendar

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee, versus

Rene Sanchez-Quintero,

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:21-CR-390-1

USDC No. 4:21-CR-215-1

Before Davis, Jones, and Elrod, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

In this consolidated appeal, Rene Sanchez-Quintero challenges his conviction and sentence for illegal reentry after removal under 8 U.S.C.

Case: 21-50835 Document: 00516225481 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/04/2022

No. 21-50835 c/w No. 21-50847

§ 1326(a) and (b)(2), and a separate judgment revoking the term of supervised release imposed in an earlier case. Because his appellate brief does not address the validity of the revocation or the revocation sentence, Sanchez-Quintero has abandoned any challenge to the revocation judgment. See United States v. Reagan, 596 F.3d 251, 254-55 (5th Cir. 2010).

With respect to his illegal reentry conviction and sentence, Sanchez- Quintero argues for the first time that § 1326(b) is unconstitutional because it permits a defendant to be sentenced above the statutory maximum under § 1326(a) based on the fact of a prior conviction that was not alleged in the indictment or found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. He has filed an unopposed motion for summary disposition and a letter brief explaining that he raises the issue only to preserve it for further review and conceding correctly that the issue is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998). See United States v. Pervis, 937 F.3d 546, 553-54 (5th Cir. 2019). Because summary disposition is appropriate, see Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969), Sanchez- Quintero’s motion is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.