USA v. Gonzalez-Cruz, No. 05-41744 (5th Cir. 2006)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT December 12, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-41744 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CARLOS GONZALEZ-CRUZ, Defendant-Appellant. -------------------Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:05-CR-579-ALL -------------------Before KING, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Carlos Gonzalez-Cruz appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for attempting to enter the United States without consent after having been deported, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Gonzalez-Cruz argues that the district court erred by imposing a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) based upon his Texas conviction for burglary of a habitation. foreclosed. As Gonzalez-Cruz concedes, his argument is See United States v. Valdez-Maltos, 443 F.3d 910, 911 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 127 S. Ct. 265 (2006); United * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. No. 05-41744 -2States v. Garcia-Mendez, 420 F.3d 454, 456-57 (5th Cir. 2005), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 1398 (2006). Gonzalez-Cruz also challenges, in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), the constitutionality of § 1326(b) s treatment of prior felony and aggravated felony convictions as sentencing factors rather than elements of the offense that must be found by a jury. Gonzalez-Cruz s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). Although he contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi, we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding. See United States v. Garza-Lopez, 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). Gonzalez- Cruz properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review. AFFIRMED.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.