United States v. Escobar

Case: 25-50922 Document: 45-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/24/2026

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 25-50922 Summary Calendar FILED ____________ August 24, 2026 Lyle W. Cayce United States of America, Clerk Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Felix Antonio Escobar, Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:24-CR-2276-1 ______________________________ Before Jones, Ho, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam: * Felix Antonio Escobar appeals his sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326.

He argues that § 1326(b) is unconstitutional because it treats a prior conviction that increases the statutory maximum as a sentencing factor, rather than as an element of the offense. The Government moves for summary affirmance or, alternatively, an extension of time in which to file a Case: 25-50922 Document: 45-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/24/2026

No. 25-50922 brief. Escobar takes no position on the motion but concedes that his argument is foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez- Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998).

Escobar correctly concedes that his 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)). Thus, 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 to file a brief is DENIED AS MOOT, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.