Opinion
No. 16-40663
06-01-2017
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. JORGE BACIO-GONZALES, also known as Jorge Bacio-Gonzalez, Defendant-Appellant
Summary Calendar Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 5:15-CR-894-1 Before JOLLY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. --------
Jorge Bacio-Gonzales appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for reentry of a deported alien. He contends that the district court erred in increasing his offense level pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) (2015) based on his prior Texas felony convictions for burglary of a habitation under Texas Penal Code § 30.02(a). Bacio-Gonzales argues, under Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016), that the Texas burglary statute is not divisible and that not every violation of § 30.02(a) qualifies as a crime of violence under § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) (2015).
The Government has filed an opposed motion for summary affirmance asserting that Bacio-Gonzales's arguments are foreclosed by our recent decision in United States v. Uribe, 838 F.3d 667 (5th Cir. 2016), cert. denied, 2017 WL 661924 (Mar. 20, 2017) (No. 16-7969). In the alternative, the Government requests an extension of time in which to file a brief on the merits.
The Government is correct that Uribe forecloses Bacio-Gonzales's Mathis argument. See Uribe, 838 F.3d at 669-71. Accordingly, the motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, the alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.