United States v. Medina-Garcia ( 1999 )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-20158
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
GILBERTO MEDINA-GARCIA,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-98-CR-342-1
- - - - - - - - - -
October 19, 1999
Before JONES, SMITH, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Gilberto Medina-Garcia appeals his guilty-plea conviction
for illegal reentry into the United States following deportation,
in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b). He argues that the
district court erred by applying the 16-level increase pursuant
to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b) because he had been previously deported
subsequent to an aggravated-felony conviction for possession of
cocaine. We review the district court’s legal interpretation and
application of the sentencing guidelines de novo and its factual
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No.
-2-
findings for clear error. United States v. Lowder, 148 F.3d 548,
552 (5th Cir. 1998).
His argument that mere possession of cocaine does not
qualify as an aggravated felony for purposes of U.S.S.G.
§ 2L1.2(b) is precluded by our decision in United States v.
Hinojosa-Lopez, 130 F.3d 691 (5th Cir. 1997). His argument that
the term “drug trafficking” in the sentencing guidelines is
unconstitutionally vague and does not provide adequate notice is
unfounded. See United States v. Pearson, 910 F.2d 221, 223 (5th
Cir. 1991)(due process does not mandate notice of where guideline
sentence will fall within the statutory range).
Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.