United States v. Minjarez-Molina

United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit

No. 20-50612
Summary Calendar

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Ivan Ignacio Minjarez-Molina,

Defendant—Appellant,

consolidated with
_____________

No. 20-50613
_____________

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

v.

Ivan Ignacio Minjarez-Molina, also known as Ivan Minjarez-
Molina, also known as Ivan I. Minjarez, also known
as Ivan Minjarez, also known as Ivan Minjarez Molina, also
known as Ivan Ignacio Minjarez, also known as Ivan Ignacio
Molina-Minjarez,

Defendant—Appellant.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
December 15, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
Case: 20-50612 Document: 00515674359 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/15/2020

No. 20-50612
2

Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 4:20-cr-2-1

Before Wiener, Southwick, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Ivan Ignacio Minjarez-Molina appeals his 30-month within-guidelines
sentence imposed following his guilty plea for entry after deportation, in
violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He also appeals the concomitant revocation of
his supervised release related to his prior conviction for conspiracy to
distribute 500 grams of more of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
§ 841 and § 846.
Raising one issue on appeal, Minjarez-Molina argues that the
recidivism enhancement under § 1326(b) is unconstitutional in light of
Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), and subsequent decisions
because it allows a sentence above the otherwise applicable statutory
maximum based on facts that are neither alleged in the indictment or found
by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. He concedes that this argument is
foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 226-27
(1998), but seeks to preserve the issue for further review. The Government
filed an unopposed motion for summary affirmance agreeing that the issue is
foreclosed and, in the alternative, a motion for an extension of time to file a
brief.
As the Government argues, and Minjarez-Molina concedes, the sole
issue raised on appeal is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres. See United States

*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 20-50612 Document: 00515674359 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/15/2020

No. 20-50612
3
v. Wallace, 759 F.3d 486, 497 (5th Cir. 2014); United States v. Pineda-
Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625-26 (5th Cir. 2007). Because the issue is
foreclosed, summary affirmance is appropriate. See Groendyke Transp., Inc.
v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969).
Although the appeals of Minjarez-Molina’s illegal reentry conviction
and supervised release revocation were consolidated, he does not address the
revocation in his appellate brief. Consequently, he has abandoned any
challenge to the revocation or revocation sentence. See Yohey v. Collins, 985
F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir.1993).
Accordingly, the Government’s motion for summary affirmance is
GRANTED, and the judgments of the district court are AFFIRMED.
The Government’s alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief
is DENIED.

Case: 20-50612 Document: 00515674359 Page: 3 Date Filed: 12/15/2020