188 F. App'x 326
5th Cir.
2006

Efren GUTIERREZ, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided July 17, 2006.

188 Fed. Appx. 326

Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Efren Gutierrez, Jr., raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Government‘s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Lionel E. LEWIS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Burl CAIN, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 04-30648.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided July 17, 2006.

188 Fed. Appx. 326

Before JOLLY, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

Thomas M. Calogero, Regan & Associates, New Orleans, LA, Kris A. Moe, Tucson, AZ, for Petitioner-Appellant. Andrea F. Long, District Attorney‘s Office for The Parish of Jefferson, Gretna, LA, for Respondent-Appellee.

PER CURIAM:*

This appeal of the District Court‘s denial of habeas corpus was limited to the issue of whether the state prosecutor substantially interfered with petitioner‘s right to call a confidential informant as a defense witness. Petitioner failed to present this claim properly to the state court. Failure to exhaust state remedies bars federal habeas relief. Whitehead v. Johnson, 157 F.3d 384, 387 (5th Cir. 1998). Therefore, the judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Taj Ramel LEE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-41449.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided July 17, 2006.

188 Fed. Appx. 326

Summary Calendar.

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 R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.

Notes

*
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 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 R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 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.