United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT July 10, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 06-50727
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RAMON REBOLLAR-MEDINA, also known as Sergio Garcia-Aguilar,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 3:05-CR-2723-ALL
--------------------
Before DeMOSS, STEWART and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Ramon Rebollar-Medina (Rebollar) appeals his conviction and
sentence for illegal reentry following deportation. Rebollar
argues that the district court erred in characterizing his state
conviction for transporting cocaine as an aggravated felony under
U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, but he states that his argument is moot in
light of his release from imprisonment. He also challenges the
constitutionality of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)’s treatment of prior
felony and aggravated felony convictions as sentencing factors
rather than elements of the offense that must be found by a jury
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 06-50727
-2-
in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), but
acknowledges that this argument is foreclosed in light of
Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998).
The Government has filed a motion for summary affirmance,
arguing that Rebollar’s appeal is moot and foreclosed. Both
parties have informed this court that Rebollar has been released
from prison and has been deported.
In United States v. Rosenbaum-Alanis, ___ F.3d ___, No. 05-
41400, 2007 WL 926832, *1-2 (5th Cir. 2007), we held that an
appellant’s challenge to the characterization of a state offense
as an aggravated felony under § 2L1.2 was moot when the appellant
had completed his term of imprisonment and had been deported.
Accordingly, Rebollar’s argument in this regard is moot. See
Rosenbaum-Alanis, 2007 WL 926832 at *2. As such, the
Government’s motion is denied in part, and Rebollar’s appeal is
dismissed in part as moot.
Additionally, Rebollar’s challenge to § 1326(b) is
foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres. The Government’s
motion for summary affirmance is granted in part, and the
judgment of the district court is affirmed in part.
MOTION GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; APPEAL DISMISSED
IN PART; JUDGMENT AFFIRMED IN PART.