Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dennis Alexia LANZA-GUILLEN, also known as Dennis Lanza, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-08-25
Citations: 195 F. App'x 225
Docket Number: No. 05-20959
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dennis Alexia LANZA-GUILLEN, also known as Dennis Lanza, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DAVIS, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 195
Pages: 225–226

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dennis Alexia LANZA-GUILLEN, also known as Dennis Lanza, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-20959
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Aug. 25, 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, H. Michael Sokolow, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before DAVIS, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Dennis Alexia Lanza-Guillen appeals his guilty-plea conviction and 57-month sentence for violating 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2) by being found in the United States without permission, following deportation. Lanza-Guillen challenges as unconstitutional § 1326(b)'s treatment of prior felony and aggravated felony convictions as sen teneing factors rather than elements of the offense that must be found by a jury.
Lanza-Guillen'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 Lanza-Guillen 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). Lanza-Guillen 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.