U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 2023

United States v. Avalos-Sanchez

United States v. Avalos-Sanchez
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided December 13, 2023

United States v. Avalos-Sanchez

Opinion

Case: 23-50342 Document: 00517000539 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/13/2023

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit _____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 23-50342 consolidated with FILED No. 23-50356 December 13, 2023 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce _____________ Clerk United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Jose Luis Avalos-Sanchez, Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC Nos. 2:20-CR-254-1, 2:22-CR-682-1 ______________________________ Before Dennis, Elrod, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam: * Jose Luis Avalos-Sanchez appeals his conviction and sentence for illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b) as well as the judgment revoking his supervised release for a prior offense. He has not _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

Case: 23-50342 Document: 00517000539 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/13/2023

23-50342 c/w No. 23-50356 briefed, and has therefore abandoned, any challenge to the revocation of supervised release or to the revocation sentence. See United States v. Reagan, 596 F.3d 251, 254-55 (5th Cir. 2010).

Avalos-Sanchez contends that the enhancement of his illegal-reentry sentence pursuant to § 1326(b) is unconstitutional because the fact of a prior conviction was not charged and proved beyond a reasonable doubt. He has filed a letter brief and an unopposed motion for summary disposition in which, explaining that he seeks to preserve the issue for further review, he concedes this argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998). Because Avalos-Sanchez is correct that his argument is foreclosed, see United States v. Pervis, 937 F.3d 546, 553-54 (5th Cir. 2019), summary disposition is appropriate, see Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969).

Avalos-Sanchez’s motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgments are AFFIRMED.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.