United States v. Garcia-Ramirez

Case: 25-50905 Document: 50-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/20/2026

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 25-50905

Summary Calendar FILED ____________ July 20, 2026 Lyle W. Cayce United States of America, Clerk Plaintiff—Appellee, versus

Martin Salud Garcia-Ramirez,

Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:25-CR-1130-1 ______________________________

Before Clement, Richman, and Willett, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam: *

Martin Salud Garcia-Ramirez appeals his sentence for illegal reentry into the United States after having been removed, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He contends that § 1326(b) is unconstitutional because it allows a sentence above the otherwise applicable statutory maximum based on facts that are neither alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury beyond a Case: 25-50905 Document: 50-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/20/2026

No. 25-50905 reasonable doubt. He concedes that this argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but he raises the issue to preserve it. The government has moved without opposition for summary affirmance, or, alternatively, for an extension of time to file a brief. Garcia-Ramirez’s sole 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) (Almendarez-Torres “persists as a narrow exception permitting judges to find only the fact of a prior conviction” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)). Thus, summary affirmance is proper. 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 government’s alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.