Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Shirley THIBODEAUX, 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 708
Docket Number: No. 04-20231
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Shirley THIBODEAUX, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 115
Pages: 708–708

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Shirley THIBODEAUX, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 04-20231.
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, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Laura Fletcher Leavitt, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Michael L. Herman, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Shirley Thibodeaux appeals her sentence imposed on a guilty-plea conviction for fraud in connection with identification documents in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028(a)(7), (b)(1)(D), (c)(3)(A). Thibodeaux argues that the district court erred in imposing a 12-level adjustment because the loss attributed to Thibodeaux exceeded $200,000, a two-level adjustment because the offense involved more than 10 but fewer than 50 victims, and a two-level adjustment because Thibodeaux used one means of identification to unlawfully obtain another means of identification. See U.S.S.G. § 2Bl.l(b)(l)(G), (b)(2)(A), (b)(9)(C)(i)(Nov.2002).
For the first time on appeal, Thibodeaux argues that these sentencing adjustments were unconstitutional under Blakely v. Washington, — U.S.-, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004). As Thibodeaux concedes, her Blakely argument is foreclosed by this court's decision in United States v. Pineiro, 377 F.3d 464, 473 (5th Cir.2004), petition for cert. filed (U.S. July 14, 2004) (No. 04-5263). Accordingly, Thibodeaux's sentence 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.