Background
Hamilton Douglas Lanza-Rios appealed his conviction and sentence for illegal reentry under Section eight thousand three hundred twenty-six of Title eight of the United States Code. He raised a constitutional challenge to the sentencing enhancement provisions for the first time on appeal.
The court’s reasoning
The court determined that Lanza-Rios’s sole argument was foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres v. United States. The court noted that Almendarez-Torres persists as a narrow exception permitting judges to find only the fact of a prior conviction. Citing United States v. Pervis and Erlinger v. United States, the court concluded that summary affirmance was appropriate.
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces the binding nature of Almendarez-Torres in the Fifth Circuit regarding sentencing enhancements for illegal reentry, preventing defendants from raising new constitutional challenges to these enhancements on appeal.