USA v. Agustine Sanchez-Hernandez
Filing
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED.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]
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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?