UNITED STATES v. HERRERA GONZALEZ (2020)

Alberto Alejandro Herrera-Gonzalez appeals his sentence to 165 months of imprisonment and five years of supervised release following his guilty-plea conviction of conspiring to possess with intent to distribute more than 500 grams of methamphetamine. He contends that the United States Sentencing Guidelines represent an unconstitutional delegation of congressional authority. While Herrera-Gonzalez acknowledges this argument is foreclosed by Mistretta v. United States, 488 U.S. 361, 109 S.Ct. 647, 102 L.Ed.2d 714 (1989), he nevertheless seeks to preserve it.

The Supreme Court held in Mistretta that “Congress’ delegation of authority to the Sentencing Commission is sufficiently specific and detailed to meet constitutional requirements.” 488 U.S. at 374, 109 S.Ct. 647. Herrera-Gonzalez's argument is indeed foreclosed, and summary affirmance is appropriate. See Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969).

Accordingly, the Government's motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED; the Government's alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

Per Curiam:* FN* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.