Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel RODRIGUEZ-MERCADO, also known as Miguel Villafranco-Ponce, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-02-23
Citations: 169 F. App'x 202
Docket Number: No. 05-40372
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel RODRIGUEZ-MERCADO, also known as Miguel Villafranco-Ponce, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 169
Pages: 202–203

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel RODRIGUEZ-MERCADO, also known as Miguel Villafranco-Ponce, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-40372.
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided Feb. 23, 2006.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern Dis trict of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Laura Fletcher Leavitt, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Miguel Rodriguez-Mercado appeals his guilty-plea conviction for being an alien unlawfully found in the United States after deportation, having previously been convicted of an aggravated felony, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b).
Rodriguez-Mercado challenges the constitutionality of § 1326(b). His 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 Rodriguez-Mercado contends that Almendarez-Torres 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). Rodriguez-Mercado 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.
The judgment of the district court is 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.