USA v. Rodriguez-Juarez, No. 22-50004 (5th Cir. 2022)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 22-50004 Document: 00516445606 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/24/2022 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 22-50004 August 24, 2022 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Carlos Bladimir Rodriguez-Juarez, Defendant—Appellant, consolidated with _____________ No. 22-50011 _____________ United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Carlos Rodriguez-Juarez, Defendant—Appellant. Case: 22-50004 Document: 00516445606 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/24/2022 No. 22-50004 c/w No. 22-50011 Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC Nos. 4:19-CR-458-1, 4:21-CR-783-1 Before King, Higginson, and Willett, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Carlos Rodriguez-Juarez appeals (1) his conviction and sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2) for illegal reentry into the United States, and (2) the judgment revoking his term of supervised release for a prior offense. The latter challenge is unbriefed and therefore abandoned. See United States v. Reagan, 596 F.3d 251, 254–55 (5th Cir. 2010). As for the underlying conviction and sentence, Rodriguez-Juarez contends for the first time on appeal that § 1326(b) is unconstitutional because it permits a sentence above the otherwise-applicable statutory maximum in § 1326(a) based on facts that were neither alleged in the indictment nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. Rodriguez-Juarez acknowledges this argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998). See also United States v. Pervis, 937 F.3d 546, 553– 54 (5th Cir. 2019). He nevertheless seeks to preserve it for possible Supreme Court review and has filed an unopposed motion for summary disposition. As Rodriguez-Juarez’s position “is clearly right as a matter of law so that there can be no substantial question as to the outcome of the case,” * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. 2 Case: 22-50004 Document: 00516445606 Page: 3 Date Filed: 08/24/2022 No. 22-50004 c/w No. 22-50011 Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969), summary affirmance is proper. Rodriguez-Juarez’s unopposed motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgments are AFFIRMED. 3
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.
