USA v. Agustine Sanchez-Hernandez


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [14-40876 Affirmed ] Judge: WED , Judge: EHJ , Judge: SAH Mandate pull date is 07/07/2015 for Appellant Agustine Sanchez-Hernandez; granting motion for summary affirmance filed by Appellant Mr. Agustine Sanchez-Hernandez [7839298-2] [14-40876]

Download PDF
Case: 14-40876 Document: 00513079402 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/16/2015 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 14-40876 Conference Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 16, 2015 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee Lyle W. Cayce Clerk v. AGUSTINE SANCHEZ-HERNANDEZ, also known as Agustin Sanchez, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:14-CR-395-1 Before DAVIS, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Agustine SanchezHernandez raises an argument that he concedes is foreclosed by United States v. Rodriguez, 711 F.3d 541, 562-63 & n.28 (5th Cir. 2013) (en banc), in which we held that the generic, contemporary definition of “sexual abuse of a minor” does not require the age of consent to be below 17 years old and does not include the asserted age-differential requirement. He also raises an argument that he 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 14-40876 Document: 00513079402 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/16/2015 No. 14-40876 concedes is foreclosed by United States v. Elizondo-Hernandez, 755 F.3d 779, 782 (5th Cir. 2014), cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 1011 (2015), which held that the Texas offense of indecency with a child by contact satisfied the generic definition of “sexual abuse of minor.” Accordingly, the unopposed 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?