IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-50625
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JOSE LUIS ESTRADA-GARCIA,
Defendant-Appellant;
____________________
Consolidated with
No. 00-50712
_____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
GERMAN GALAVIS-ACOSTA,
Defendant- Appellant;
____________________
Consolidated with
No. 00-50729
_____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JESUS ELIAS MENDOZA-CASTANEDA, also known as Lucio Hernandez-
Garcia
Defendant-Appellant;
No. 00-50625
c/w Nos. 00-50712 &
00-50729 & 00-50788
- 2 -
____________________
Consolidated with
No. 00-50766
_____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RAFAEL TALAVERA-ROSAS,
Defendant-Appellant.
____________________
Consolidated with
No. 00-50788
_____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
GUSTAVO CALDERA-ROMERO,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
- - - - - - - - - -
February 15, 2001
Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 00-50625
c/w Nos. 00-50712 &
00-50729 & 00-50788
- 3 -
Jose Luis Estrada-Garcia, German Galavis-Acosta, Jesus Elias
Mendoza-Castaneda, Rafael Talavera-Rosas, and Gustavo Caldera-
Romero (collectively the Defendants) appeal their sentences
following their guilty plea convictions for illegal re-entry
after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. The
Defendants argue that their sentences should not have exceeded
the two-year maximum sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). The
Defendants acknowledge that their argument is foreclosed by
Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but they
seek to preserve the issue for Supreme Court review in light of
Apprendi v. New Jersey, 120 S. Ct. 2348 (2000).
The Defendants’ argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres,
523 U.S. at 235.
The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of
filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks
that the judgments of the district court be affirmed and that an
appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is granted.
AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.