Case: 25-50065 Document: 49-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/31/2025

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit ____________ FILED July 31, 2025 No. 25-50065 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk

United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Martin Alonso Munoz Rodriguez, Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:24-CR-257-1 ______________________________ Before King, Haynes, and Ho, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:* Martin Alonso Munoz Rodriguez appeals following his conviction for illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), arguing for the first time on appeal that the statutory sentencing enhancement in § 1326(b) is unconstitutional. The Government has filed a motion for summary affirmance or, alternatively, for an extension of time in which to file a brief.

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

Case: 25-50065 Document: 49-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/31/2025

No. 25-50065

While Munoz Rodriguez takes no position on the motion, he concedes that his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998).

The parties are correct that the argument is foreclosed. 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 therefore appropriate. See Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969). Accordingly, the motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, the alternative motion for an extension of time is DENIED AS MOOT, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.