Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hugo Humberto IBARRA-PEREZ, also known as Hugo Ibarra-Perez, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-06-20
Citations: 190 F. App'x 339
Docket Number: No. 05-41739
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hugo Humberto IBARRA-PEREZ, also known as Hugo Ibarra-Perez, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before STEWART, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 190
Pages: 339–340

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hugo Humberto IBARRA-PEREZ, also known as Hugo Ibarra-Perez, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-41739
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
June 20, 2006.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Molly E. Odom, Sarah Beth Landau, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendan1>-Appellant.
Before STEWART, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Hugo Humberto Ibarra-Perez (Ibarra) appeals his guilty plea conviction and sentence for reentry after deportation following a conviction for an aggravated felony. He contends that the "felony" and "aggravated felony" provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are unconstitutional. The Government does not seek to enforce Ibarra's appeal waiver; therefore, it is nonbinding. See United States v. Story, 439 F.3d 226, 231 (5th Cir.2006).
Ibarra'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). Although Ibarra contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding. See United States v. Garza-Lopez, 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 298, 163 L.Ed.2d 260 (2005). Ibarra properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent, but he 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.