Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rogelio CRUZ-SANCHEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-12-12
Citations: 209 F. App'x 433
Docket Number: No. 05-41577
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rogelio CRUZ-SANCHEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before KING, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 209
Pages: 433–433

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rogelio CRUZ-SANCHEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-41577
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Dec. 12, 2006.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Molly E. Odom, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before KING, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Rogelio Cruz-Sanchez appeals his conviction and sentence following his guilty plea for being an alien attempting to illegally reenter the United States after deportation. Cruz-Sanchez argues that the "felony" and "aggravated felony" provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (2) are unconstitutional.
Cruz-Sanchez's constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Although Cruz-Sanchez contends that AlmendarezTorres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding. See United States v. Garza-Lopez, 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 298, 163 L.Ed.2d 260 (2005). Cruz-Sanchez properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review.
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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.