Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Guadalupe RANGEL-TREVINO, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-09-28
Citations: 249 F. App'x 336
Docket Number: No. 06-40381
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Guadalupe RANGEL-TREVINO, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 249
Pages: 336–336

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Guadalupe RANGEL-TREVINO, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-40381
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Sept. 28, 2007.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Timothy William Crooks, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Having pleaded guilty to being an alien unlawfully found in the United States after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, Guadalupe Rangel-Trevino contends the district court erroneously construed his prior Texas conviction for aggravated assault as a crime of violence and incorrectly applied a sentence enhancement under Sentencing Guidelines § 2L1.2. In the light of our court's recent decision in United States v. Guillen-Alvarez, 489 F.3d 197, 199-201 (5th Cir.2007), Rangel's assertion is unavailing.
Citing Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), Rangel 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. Our court has held this issue "fully foreclosed from further debate". United States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir.2007), petition for cert, filed (Aug. 28, 2007) (No. 07-6202).
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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.