USA v. Marcial Castro, No. 11-10133 (5th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 11-10133 Document: 00511563042 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/05/2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 11-10133 Summary Calendar August 5, 2011 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. MARCIAL CASTRO, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:10-CR-204-1 Before BENAVIDES, STEWART and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Marcial Castro pleaded guilty to one count of unlawful reentry and was sentenced to 120 months in prison. He now appeals, arguing that the district court erred by ordering that his federal sentence run consecutively to any sentence that might be imposed in a pending state criminal case. The Government has moved to dismiss the appeal based on a waiver contained in Castro s post-plea sentencing agreement, or for summary affirmance on the basis * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. Case: 11-10133 Document: 00511563042 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/05/2011 No. 11-10133 of binding circuit precedent. Alternatively, the Government seeks an extension of time to file a brief. Castro argues that the waiver does not bar the appeal. We need not reach the disputed waiver issue because, as Castro concedes, his argument is foreclosed by United States v. Brown, 920 F.2d 1212, 1216-17 (5th Cir. 1991), abrogated on other grounds by United States v. Candia, 454 F.3d 468, 472-73 (5th Cir. 2006), in which we held that a district court may order a term of imprisonment to run consecutively to a yet-to-be-imposed state sentence. Despite Castro s arguments that Brown was incorrectly decided, Brown remains the law of this circuit, as we held in United States v. Setser, 607 F.3d 128, 131-32 (5th Cir. 2010), cert. granted, 2011 WL 2297806 (June 13, 2011) (No. 10-7387). Although the Supreme Court has granted a writ of certiorari in Setser, this court is bound to follow precedent even when certiorari has been granted. See United States v. Lopez-Velasquez, 526 F.3d 804, 808 n.1 (5th Cir. 2008). The Government s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The Government s motions to dismiss and, alternatively, for an extension of time are DENIED. 2
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.
