The Fifth Circuit affirmed a conviction for illegal reentry after the defendant raised a constitutional challenge to a recidivism enhancement for the first time on appeal. The court held that the argument was foreclosed by existing Supreme Court precedent.
Background
Carlos Cuellar-Lopez was convicted and sentenced for illegal reentry under Section thirteen twenty-six of Title eight of the United States Code. He appealed, arguing for the first time that the recidivism enhancement in subsection b of that statute is unconstitutional.
The court’s reasoning
The court determined that the defendant’s sole argument was foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres versus United States. The court noted that the Supreme Court has explained that Almendarez-Torres persists as a narrow exception permitting judges to find only the fact of a prior conviction. The court cited United States versus Pervis and Erlinger versus United States to support this conclusion.
What it means going forward
The ruling reinforces that challenges to recidivism enhancements under Section thirteen twenty-six must be raised in the district court, as they are foreclosed on direct appeal by existing precedent.
