Court Opinion

ID: 8600225
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-23 21:29:30.765874+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:55:09.932661
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM: *
Jaime Olvera-Valdovinos appeals his illegal reentry conviction, challenging the constitutionality of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (2). We do not reach the applicability of the sentencing waiver because Olvera’s *625constitutional 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 Olvera 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 AlmendarezTorres 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). Olvera 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 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.