Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sofia Marisol LANDIN-MARTINEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-03-05
Citations: 220 F. App'x 344
Docket Number: No. 05-41569
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sofia Marisol LANDIN-MARTINEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DeMOSS, STEWART and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 220
Pages: 344–345

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sofia Marisol LANDIN-MARTINEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-41569
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
March 5, 2007.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern Dis trict of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Bowen W. Sutton, Law Offices of Bowen W. Sutton, San Antonio, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.
Before DeMOSS, STEWART and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Sofia Marisol Landin-Martinez (Landin) appeals her guilty-plea conviction of, and 41-month sentence for, violating 8 U.S.C. § 1326 by being found in the United States without permission after deportation. Landin argues, in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), that the 41-month term of imprisonment imposed in her case exceeds the statutory maximum sentence allowed for the § 1326 offense charged in her indictment. She challenges the constitutionality of § 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.
Landin'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). This court has repeatedly rejected the argument raised by Landin on the basis that AlmendarezTorres remains binding despite Apprendi. See United States v. Garzar-Lopez, 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 298, 163 L.Ed.2d 260 (2005). Landin acknowledges that her argument is unavailing in light of Almendarez-Torres, but she 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.