Court Opinion

ID: 40280
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 20:42:23+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:29.496153
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                December 14, 2005

                                                          Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                  Clerk
                            No. 05-40920
                        Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                    Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MARCOS ANTONIO GONZALEZ-OSORIO,

                                    Defendant-Appellant.

                       --------------------
          Appeal from the United States District Court
               for the Southern District of Texas
                     USDC No. 2:05-CR-23-ALL
                       --------------------

Before KING, Chief Judge, and HIGGINBOTHAM and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Marcos Antonio Gonzalez-Osorio (“Gonzalez”) was convicted of

illegally reentering the United States having previously been

deported following a felony conviction, in violation of 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(a), (b).   Gonzalez’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 Gonzalez contends that

Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of

the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 05-40920
                                -2-

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).   Gonzalez

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.