Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Pedro JAIMES-AGUIRRE, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-12-12
Citations: 258 F. App'x 662
Docket Number: No. 07-40105
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Pedro JAIMES-AGUIRRE, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before REAVLEY, BARKSDALE, and GARZA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 258
Pages: 662–663

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Pedro JAIMES-AGUIRRE, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 07-40105
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Dec. 12, 2007.
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, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before REAVLEY, BARKSDALE, and GARZA, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Pedro Jaimes-Aguirre (Jaimes) appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for illegal reentry after having previously been deported. Jaimes contends that his sentence is unreasonable because this court's post-Booker rulings have effectively reinstated the mandatory guidelines regime condemned in Booker. As Jaimes concedes, this argument is foreclosed. See Rita v. United States, — U.S.-,-, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2462, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007).
In light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), Jaimes challenges the constitutionality of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)'s treatment of prior felony and aggravated felony convictions as sentencing factors rather than elements of the offense that must be found by a jury. This court has held that this issue is "fully foreclosed from further debate." United States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir.2007), cert. denied - U.S. -, 128 S.Ct. 872, 169 L.Ed.2d 737 (2008).
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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
. United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S. Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005).