Case: 22-51072 Document: 00516739118 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/04/2023

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 22-51072 Summary Calendar FILED ____________ May 4, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce United States of America, Clerk Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Esteban Quinonez-Quinonez, Defendant—Appellant, consolidated with _____________ No. 22-51079 _____________ United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Esteban Valentin Quinonez-Quinonez, Defendant—Appellant.

Case: 22-51072 Document: 00516739118 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/04/2023 No. 22-51072 c/w No. 22-51079 _____________________________ Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC Nos. 4:22-CR-633-1, 7:21-CR-323-1 ______________________________ Before Jones, Haynes, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam: * Esteban Valentin Quinonez-Quinonez appeals his conviction and sentence for illegal reentry into the United States under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(1). He also appeals the district court’s order revoking the term of supervised release he was serving at the time of the offense. Because his appellate brief does not address the revocation or revocation sentence, he has abandoned any challenge to that order. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993).

For the first time on appeal, Quinonez-Quinonez argues that his sentence exceeds the statutory maximum and is therefore unconstitutional because the district court enhanced his sentence under § 1326(b) 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 raises the issue to preserve it for further review and has filed an unopposed motion for summary disposition, correctly conceding 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 his argument is foreclosed, summary disposition is appropriate. See Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969). Accordingly, Quinonez-Quinonez’s motion for summary

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

Case: 22-51072 Document: 00516739118 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/04/2023

No. 22-51072 c/w No. 22-51079 disposition is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgments are AFFIRMED.