Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Mario BERNABE-DIAZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-06-21
Citations: 190 F. App'x 345
Docket Number: No. 05-41521
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Mario BERNABE-DIAZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before STEWART, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 190
Pages: 345–346

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Mario BERNABE-DIAZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-41521
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
June 21, 2006.
James Lee Turner, John Richard Berry, Assistant U.S. Attomies, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, H. Michael Sokolow, Michael L. Herman, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before STEWART, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Jose Mario Bernabe-Diaz (Bernabe) appeals his guilty plea conviction and sentence for illegal reentry into the United States. 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). His 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 Bernabe contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi, 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). Bernabe 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. Because Bernabe has shown no error in the judgment of the district court, 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.