USA v. Francisco Millan-Arteaga

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [13-40851 Affirmed ] Judge: ECP , Judge: JWE , Judge: CH Mandate pull date is 05/07/2014 for Appellant Francisco Ivan Millan-Arteaga; granting motion for summary affirmance filed by Appellant Mr. Francisco Ivan Millan-Arteaga [7513522-2] [13-40851]

Download PDF
Case: 13-40851 Document: 00512597938 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/16/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 13-40851 Conference Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED April 16, 2014 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee Lyle W. Cayce Clerk v. FRANCISCO IVAN MILLAN-ARTEAGA, also known as Francisco Ivan Millan-Artega, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:13-CR-690-1 Before PRADO, ELROD, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Francisco Ivan MillanArteaga raises an argument that he concedes is foreclosed by United States v. Morales-Mota, 704 F.3d 410, 412 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 133 S. Ct. 2374 (2013). In Morales-Mota, 704 F.3d at 412, this court, relying upon its holding in United States v. Joslin, 487 F. App’x 139, 141-43 (5th Cir. 2012) (unpublished), cert. 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. * Case: 13-40851 Document: 00512597938 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/16/2014 No. 13-40851 denied, 133 S. Ct. 1847 (2013), rejected the argument that the Texas offense of “burglary of a habitation” is outside the generic, contemporary definition of “burglary of a dwelling” under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) because it defines the “owner” of a habitation as a person with a “greater right to possession.” Accordingly, the appellant’s motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and 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?