USA vs. Sorto-Guzman, (5th Cir. 2000)
Linked as:
Text
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .
R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-40884 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JOSE SORTO-GUZMAN, also known as Mario Alberto Padilla-Gutierrez, also known as Jose Sorto, also known as Jose Salome Guzman, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-99-CR-69-1 August 16, 2000 Before DAVIS, JONES and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Jose Sorto-Guzman appeals his conviction for one count of illegal reentry. He first argues that his indictment was defective for charging him with a prohibited status offense.
This argument is foreclosed by our recent decision in United States v. Tovias-Marroquin , F.3d (5th Cir. July 11, 2000, No. 99-40881).
Sorto argues that the indictment was defective for failure to allege specific intent. This issue was already decided adversely to him. See United States v. Trevino-Martinez ,
However, these instructions were not an accurate statement of law. Consequently, the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to give these requested instructions.
See United States v. Chaney , 964 F.2d 437, 444 (5th Cir. 1992). SortoÂ’s final argument is that his indictment should have been dismissed because his prior deportation violated due process. This issue has already been decided adversely to him in United States v. Benitez-Villafuerte , 1
No. 99-40884
Sponsored links
