Court Opinion

ID: 46319
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 22:56:46+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:39:23.628493
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                 October 25, 2006

                                                          Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                  Clerk
                            No. 05-20748
                        Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                    Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE ANTONIO DIMAS-SALGADO, also known as Vicente Dimas, also
known as Vicente Dimas Salgado,

                                    Defendant-Appellant.

                       --------------------
           Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Southern District of Texas
                     USDC No. 4:05-CR-154-ALL
                       --------------------

Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Jose Antonio Dimas-Salgado appeals his guilty plea

conviction and sentence for illegal reentry into the United

States.   He argues that the felony and aggravated felony

provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (2) are unconstitutional

in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000).       His

constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v.

United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998).   Although Dimas-Salgado

contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that

     *
       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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 05-20748
                                -2-

a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres

in light of Apprendi, 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).   Dimas-Salgado 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.   Because Dimas-Salgado has shown no error in the

judgment of the district court, that judgment is AFFIRMED.