Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Reyes ESPINOZA-CORTEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-12-17
Citations: 115 F. App'x 722
Docket Number: No. 04-40794
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Reyes ESPINOZA-CORTEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 115
Pages: 722–722

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Reyes ESPINOZA-CORTEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 04-40794.
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided Dec. 17, 2004.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.
Timothy William Crooks, Jeffrey L. Wilde, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Jose Reyes Espinoza-Cortez appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for illegal reentry following deportation. He contends that the "felony" and "aggravated felony" provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). He argues that he may not be convicted and sentenced under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) because the indictment did not allege that he was deported after a qualifying felony or aggravated felony and that Blakely v. Washington, — U.S.-, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), dictates that his sentence violates his Sixth Amendment rights. As Espinoza-Cortez concedes, these arguments are foreclosed. See Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 247, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998); United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir.2000); see also United States v. Pineiro, 377 F.3d 464, 473 (5th Cir.), petition for cert. filed (U.S. July 14, 2004) (No. 04-5263).
AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.