United States v. Barron-Bautista
United States v. Barron-Bautista
Opinion
Case: 23-50375 Document: 00516994858 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/08/2023
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 23-50375 Summary Calendar FILED ____________ December 8, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce United States of America, Clerk Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Jesus Barron-Bautista, Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:22-CR-788-1 ______________________________ Before Willett, Duncan, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: * Jesus Barron-Bautista appeals the sentence imposed following his conviction for illegal reentry into the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). He contends for the first time on appeal that the sentencing enhancement in § 1326(b) is unconstitutional because it permits a sentence above the otherwise applicable statutory maximum established by § 1326(a) _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-50375 Document: 00516994858 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/08/2023
No. 23-50375
based on facts that are neither alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. Barron-Bautista filed an unopposed motion for summary disposition, acknowledging that the Supreme Court rejected this argument in Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), and explaining that he seeks only to preserve it for possible Supreme Court review.
We have held that subsequent Supreme Court decisions, including Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. 99 (2013), and Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), have not overruled Almendarez-Torres. See United States v. Pervis, 937 F.3d 546, 553–54 (5th Cir. 2019). Because Almendarez-Torres forecloses Barron-Bautista’s argument, summary disposition is appropriate.
See Groendyke Transp. Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969).
Accordingly, Barron-Bautista’s motion is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.