Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Issac NAVARRO-LERMA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-08-17
Citations: 145 F. App'x 74
Docket Number: No. 05-40101
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Issac NAVARRO-LERMA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before BENAVIDES, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 145
Pages: 74–75

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Issac NAVARRO-LERMA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-40101.
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided Aug. 17, 2005.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, John Richard Berry, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Laura Fletcher Leavitt, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before BENAVIDES, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Issac Navarro-Lerma appeals his sentence following his guilty-plea conviction of one charge of transporting an alien for financial gain. Navarro-Lerma argues for the first time on appeal that the district court erred by sentencing him under a mandatory sentencing guidelines scheme. See United States v. Booker, — U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). He further contends that this issue is subject to de novo review and that prejudice should be presumed because the error is structural.
We review for plain error. See United States v. Valenzuela-Quevedo, 407 F.3d 728, 732 (5th Cir.2005), cert. denied — U.S. -, — S.Ct. -, — L.Ed.2d -, 2005 WL 1811485 (2005). NavarroLerma's arguments to the contrary are, as he concedes, foreclosed. See id; see also United States v. Malveaux, 411 F.3d 558, 560 n. 9 (5th Cir.2005), cert. denied — U.S. -, — S.Ct. -, — L.Ed.2d -, 2005 WL 1670813 (2005); United States v. Martinez-Lugo, 411 F.3d 597, 600-01 (5th Cir.2005). Further, he has not shown that he is entitled to relief under the plain-error standard.
Navarro-Lerma has shown no reversible error in the judgment of the district court.
Consequently, that judgment 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.