USA v. Amaya-Reyes, No. 05-40670 (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 June 20, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 05-40670 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus LORENZO AMAYA-REYES, Defendant-Appellant. -------------------Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:04-CR-604-1 -------------------Before STEWART, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Lorenzo Amaya-Reyes appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for being unlawfully found in the United States after deportation, having previously been convicted of an aggravated felony. He argues that the felony and aggravated felony provisions of 8 U.S.C. ยง 1326(b)(1) and (2) are unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). In his plea agreement, Amaya-Reyes waived any right to have facts that the law makes essential to the punishment either * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 05-40670 -2(1) charged in the indictment or (2) proven to a jury or (3) proved beyond a reasonable doubt. The Government seeks enforcement of the waiver, arguing that it precludes AmayaReyes s argument on appeal. We assume, arguendo only, that the waiver does not bar the instant appeal. Amaya-Reyes s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). Although Amaya-Reyes 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). Amaya-Reyes 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.
