Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Marcos Antonio DELMORAL, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-11-09
Citations: 153 F. App'x 290
Docket Number: No. 05-40471
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Marcos Antonio DELMORAL, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DAVIS, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 153
Pages: 290–290

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Marcos Antonio DELMORAL, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-40471.
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided Nov. 9, 2005.
Michele A. Rateliffe, U.S. Attorney’s Office Eastern District of Texas, Plano, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Amy R. Blalock, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Denise S. Benson, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office Eastern District of Texas, Tyler, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before DAVIS, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Marcos Antonio Delmoral appeals from the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to illegal reentry into the United States following deportation. See 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He argues that the "felony" and "aggravated felony" provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (2) are unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). He concedes that his challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219,140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), and he raises it to preserve it for further review by the Supreme Court.
Apprendi did not overrule AlmendarezTorres. See Apprendi, 530 U.S. at 489-90, 120 S.Ct. 2348; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir.2000). We therefore must follow Almendarez-Torres "unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it." Dabeit, 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.