USA v. Rodriguez-Duberney

Filing 920090327

Opinion

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 08-20358 Summary Calendar March 27, 2009 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. JULIO CESAR RODRIGUEZ-DUBERNEY, also known as Julio Cesar Duverney-Rodriguez, also known as Homereo Carmanno Rodriguez, also known as Julio Cesar Rodriguez, also known as Julio Cesar Rodriguez-Duberny Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:07-CR-283-ALL Before WIENER, STEWART, AND CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Defendant-Appellant Julio Cesar Rodriguez-Duberney pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after deportation. On appeal, Rodriguez-Duberney challenges the district court's characterization of his prior conviction under the Travel Act, 18 U.S.C. 1952, as a drug trafficking offense for sentencing purposes. In United States v. Rodriguez-Duberney, 326 F.3d 613, 616-18 (5th Cir. 2003), we held that 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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. 08-20358 Rodriguez-Duberney's prior conviction warranted a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. 2L1.2. Rodriguez-Duberney asserts that this prior decision is flawed because we relied upon the charge alleged in a dismissed indictment rather than the information to which he pleaded guilty. He also maintains that the ruling in Rodriguez-Duberney has been called into question by subsequent case law holding that transportation of narcotics does not generally constitute a drug trafficking offense. A panel of this court may not overrule a prior panel's decision in the absence of intervening contrary or superseding authority. United States v. Rodriguez-Jaimes, 481 F.3d 283, 288 (5th Cir. 2007). The government's motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and its alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?