Narrative Opinion Summary
Manuel Mendoza-Gonzalez's appeal of his criminal judgment is dismissed based on established precedent from Almendarez-Torres v. United States, which clarifies that prior convictions are considered sentencing factors under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) rather than separate offenses. The Government's motion for summary affirmance has been granted, resulting in the affirmation of the district court's judgment. The opinion will not be published and is not to be treated as precedent except in specific circumstances outlined in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Legal Issues Addressed
Non-Precedential Status of Opinionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The opinion will not be published and cannot be treated as precedent, except under specific circumstances as outlined by circuit rules.
Reasoning: The opinion will not be published and is not to be treated as precedent except in specific circumstances outlined in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Prior Convictions as Sentencing Factorssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court applied the precedent set by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, determining that prior convictions are to be treated as sentencing factors under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2), rather than as separate offenses.
Reasoning: Manuel Mendoza-Gonzalez's appeal of his criminal judgment is dismissed based on established precedent from Almendarez-Torres v. United States, which clarifies that prior convictions are considered sentencing factors under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) rather than separate offenses.
Summary Affirmancesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court granted the Government's motion for summary affirmance, leading to the affirmation of the district court's judgment without a detailed opinion.
Reasoning: The Government's motion for summary affirmance has been granted, resulting in the affirmation of the district court's judgment.