Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David M. RIVERA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-10-22
Citations: 79 F. App'x 628
Docket Number: No. 03-40257
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David M. RIVERA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 79
Pages: 628–629

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David M. RIVERA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 03-40257.
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Oct. 22, 2003.
James Lee Turner, Assistant US Attorney, David Hill Peek, US Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, Mark Michael Dowd, US Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Brownsville, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Timothy William Crooks, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Roland E. Dahlin, II, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM .
David M. Rivera appeals his guilty-plea conviction for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine. In his sole argument on appeal, Rivera challenges the constitutionality of 21 U.S.C. § 841 in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). He concedes that his argument is foreclosed by this court's decision in United States v. Slaughter, 238 F.3d 580, 582 (5th Cir. 2000); however, he raises the issue in order to preserve it for possible further review.
Rivera's argument regarding the constitutionality of 21 U.S.C. § 841 is indeed foreclosed by Slaughter, which specifically rejected the argument that Apprendi rendered 21 U.S.C. § 841 facially unconstitutional. Id. This court is bound by its precedent absent an intervening Supreme Court decision or a subsequent en banc decision. See United States v. Short, 181 F.3d 620, 624 (5th Cir.1999). Accordingly, Rivera's conviction is affirmed.
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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.