¶1 Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jose Guadalupe Delgado-Aranda raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. United States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir.2007), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 128 S.Ct. 872, 169 L.Ed.2d 737 (2008). The appellant’s motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
263 F. App'x 430
United States v. Delgado-Aranda
U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided January 30, 2008
This page is marked noindex.
U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2008-01-30
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (§ 276 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Almendarez-Torres v. United States · United States v. Pineda-Arrellano · McFarling v. Monsanto Co.
Decided 2008-01-30