Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel Angel SEGOVIA-SALINAS, also known as Juan Carlos Pineda, also known as Miguel Angel Esquibel, also known as Miguel Angel Salinas, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-06-21
Citations: 185 F. App'x 429
Docket Number: No. 05-20654
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel Angel SEGOVIA-SALINAS, also known as Juan Carlos Pineda, also known as Miguel Angel Esquibel, also known as Miguel Angel Salinas, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before STEWART, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 185
Pages: 429–430

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel Angel SEGOVIA-SALINAS, also known as Juan Carlos Pineda, also known as Miguel Angel Esquibel, also known as Miguel Angel Salinas, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-20654
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
June 21, 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, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before STEWART, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Miguel Angel Segovia-Salinas (Segovia) appeals his conviction and sentence for illegal reentry after deportation following a conviction for an aggravated felony. Segovia was sentenced to 72 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release.
He asserts that the "felony" and "aggravated felony" provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are unconstitutional. Segovia'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 Segovia 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). Segovia properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of AlmendarezTorres and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review.
The district court's 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.