The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld the conviction of Raul Alfonso Moreno-Lopez for illegal reentry into the United States. The court ruled on November 10, 2026, in case number 26-50354. This decision affects Moreno-Lopez and others in similar situations, as it confirms the legality of certain immigration enforcement actions under U.S. law.

Moreno-Lopez was convicted under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), which makes it a crime for individuals who have been previously removed from the U.S. to reenter without permission. The case highlights ongoing legal debates surrounding immigration laws and the rights of individuals who have been deported.

Background

Raul Alfonso Moreno-Lopez was charged with illegal reentry after he was found back in the United States following a previous removal. The case originated in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, where he was convicted and sentenced. Moreno-Lopez appealed his conviction, arguing that the enhancement of his sentence under § 1326(b) was unconstitutional.

The argument presented by Moreno-Lopez was that the law under which he was sentenced violated his constitutional rights. Specifically, he contested the legality of using his prior convictions to enhance his sentence. However, the court noted that this argument was not new and had been addressed in previous cases.

The Ruling

The Fifth Circuit Court, in a per curiam opinion, affirmed the lower court's judgment. The judges on the panel included Circuit Judges Jones, Ho, and Wilson. The court stated, "The parties are correct that Moreno-Lopez’s argument is foreclosed," referring to the precedent set in the case of Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998). This precedent allows for the enhancement of sentences based on prior convictions.

The court also cited the case of United States v. Pineda-Arrellano, which further supports the ruling that prior convictions can be used to enhance sentences under immigration laws. The court granted the government's motion for summary affirmance, which means they agreed with the government's position without requiring further argument.

Impact

This ruling has significant implications for individuals facing similar charges of illegal reentry. It reinforces the legal framework that allows for the enhancement of sentences based on prior convictions, thereby upholding current immigration enforcement practices. The decision may deter others from attempting to reenter the U.S. illegally, knowing that such actions can lead to serious legal consequences.

Moreover, the ruling highlights the challenges that individuals in Moreno-Lopez's position face when contesting their convictions. With the court's affirmation, it becomes clear that arguments against the constitutionality of sentence enhancements under § 1326(b) are unlikely to succeed in the Fifth Circuit, given the existing legal precedents.

What's Next

Moreno-Lopez's options for appeal are limited, as the Fifth Circuit has affirmed the lower court's ruling. There is no indication in the court filing that a related case is pending, but the decision may prompt further discussions about immigration laws and their enforcement in future cases.