Court Opinion

ID: 42156
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 21:16:32+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:51.650341
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                                                                 Fifth Circuit
                                                              F I L E D
                IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                  April 11, 2006

                                                           Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                   Clerk
                             No. 05-41514
                         Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                     Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RAUL TREVINO FLORES,
                                     Defendant-Appellant.

                      --------------------
          Appeal from the United States District Court
               for the Southern District of Texas
                    USDC No. 1:05-CR-373-ALL
                      --------------------

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Raul Trevino Flores appeals his sentence for illegal

reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b).      Although

the Government seeks to dismiss the appeal as barred by the

appellate waiver provision in Trevino Flores’s plea agreement, we

need not decide whether the waiver precludes consideration of the

instant appeal as Trevino Flores’s constitutional challenge is

foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224,

235 (1998).    Although Trevino Flores contends that

Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of

     *
       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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
                           No. 05-41514
                                -2-

the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of

Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (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, 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005).   Trevino

Flores 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.   His conviction and sentence

are AFFIRMED.