United States v. Bonilla-Carbajal

Case: 24-50473 Document: 44-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/22/2025

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

____________

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

No. 24-50473

Summary Calendar FILED ____________ April 22, 2025

Lyle W. Cayce United States of America, Clerk

Plaintiff—Appellee, versus

Daniel Bonilla-Carbajal,

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:22-CR-158-1 ______________________________

Before Higginbotham, Jones, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam: *

Daniel Bonilla-Carbajal appeals following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry into the United States under 8 U.S.C. § 1326, arguing for the first time on appeal that the statutory sentence enhancement in § 1326(b) is unconstitutional. The Government moves for summary affirmance or, alternatively, an extension of time in which to file an appellate brief. Bonilla- Case: 24-50473 Document: 44-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/22/2025

No. 24-50473

Carbajal takes no position on the motion but concedes that his argument is foreclosed.

As Bonilla-Carbajal concedes, his argument 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); see also Erlinger v. United States, 602 U.S. 821, 838 (2024) (explaining that Almendarez-Torres “persists as a narrow exception permitting judges to find only the fact of a prior conviction” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)). Summary affirmance is appropriate. See Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969).

Accordingly, the Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, the alternative motion for an extension of time is DENIED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.