Court Opinion

ID: 44037
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 22:03:54+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:08.082751
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                  June 20, 2006

                                                          Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                  Clerk
                            No. 05-40420
                        Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                    Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

LUIS LEONEL VARGAS-ALARCON,
                                    Defendant-Appellant.

                       --------------------
           Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Southern District of Texas
                     USDC No. 1:04-CR-895-ALL
                       --------------------

Before STEWART, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Luis Leonel Vargas-Alarcon pleaded guilty without a plea

agreement to being an alien unlawfully found in the United States

after deportation and was sentenced to 57 months of imprisonment

and three years of supervised release.   As a condition of

supervised release, Vargas-Alarcon was ordered to cooperate in

the collection of a DNA sample as directed by his probation

officer.

     Vargas-Alarcon argues that the district court erred in

ordering him to cooperate in the collection of a DNA sample as a

     *
       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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 05-40420
                                 -2-

condition of supervised release.   This claim is dismissed for

lack of jurisdiction because it is not ripe for review.   See

United States v. Riascos-Cuenu, 428 F.3d 1100, 1101-02 (5th Cir.

2005), petition for cert. filed (Jan. 9, 2006) (No. 05-8662).

     Vargas-Alarcon’s constitutional challenge to 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(b) is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States,

523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998).   Although Vargas-Alarcon 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 (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).   Vargas-

Alarcon 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.

    JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; APPEAL DISMISSED IN PART.