NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 27 2015 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 13-50482 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:13-cr-00519-LAB v. MEMORANDUM* JULIO CESAR GARCIA-ROSAS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding Submitted July 21, 2015** Before: CANBY, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges. Julio Cesar Garcia-Rosas appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 48-month sentence imposed following his jury-trial conviction for attempted reentry of a removed alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Garcia-Rosas contends that the district court erred by using the Ninth Circuit model jury instruction on reasonable doubt. This claim fails because this court has repeatedly upheld the model instruction. See United States v. Alcantara-Castillo, No. 12-50477, 2015 WL 3619853, at *10 n.4 (9th Cir. June 11, 2015). Garcia-Rosas next contends that the district court violated the Sixth Amendment by increasing his sentence on the basis of a prior felony conviction that was not found by the jury. This argument fails. Contrary to Garcia-Rosas’s contention, the Supreme Court’s holding in Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1988), continues to bind this Court. See Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151, 2160 n.1 (2013) (declining to revisit Almendarez-Torres); United States v. Leyva–Martinez, 632 F.3d 568, 569 (9th Cir. 2011) (per curiam) (“We have repeatedly held . . . that Almendarez-Torres is binding unless it is expressly overruled by the Supreme Court.”). AFFIRMED. 2 13-50482
United States v. Julio Garcia-Rosas
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Date filed: 2015-07-27
Citations: 610 F. App'x 652
Copy CitationsCombined Opinion