Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Rafael HERNANDEZ-URIBE, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-10-25
Citations: 203 F. App'x 662
Docket Number: No. 05-41849
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Rafael HERNANDEZ-URIBE, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 203
Pages: 662–663

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Rafael HERNANDEZ-URIBE, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-41849.
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided Oct. 25, 2006.
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 JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Juan Rafael Hernandez-Uribe appeals his guilty-plea conviction for unlawful reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b). In his sole issue on appeal, Hernandez-Uribe argues that § 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 is unconstitutional in light of Ap-prendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348,147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000).
Hernandez-Uribe's constitutional challenge to § 1326(b) is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Although Hernandez-Uribe 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). Hernandez-Uribe 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.