Court Opinion

ID: 22628
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 08:00:38+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:43:37.193295
License: Public Domain

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                          FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                          _____________________

                               No. 00-40492
                             Summary Calendar
                          _____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                    Plaintiff-Appellee,

                                 versus

JAIME ASTUL VELASQUEZ-RIVERA,

                                             Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________________________________________________

      Appeal from the United States District Court for the
                    Southern District of Texas
                       USDC No. M-00-CR-34-1
_________________________________________________________________

                            December 4, 2000

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Jaime     Astul   Velasquez-Rivera   appeals   his   conviction   and

41-month sentence following his plea of guilty to illegal re-entry

into the United States after deportation, a violation of 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326.   Velasquez argues that the felony conviction that resulted

in his increased sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) was an

element of the offense that should have been charged in his

indictment.     He acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by

     *
      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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but he

seeks to preserve the issue for Supreme Court review in the light

of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 120 S.Ct. 2348 (2000).   Apprendi did not

overrule Almendarez-Torres.   See Apprendi, 120 S.Ct. at 2361-62 &

n.15; see also United States v. Dabeit, ___ F.3d ___, 2000 WL

1634264 at *4 (5th Cir. Oct. 30, 2000, No. 00-10065).    Velasquez’s

argument is foreclosed.   See Almendarez-Torres, 523 U.S. at 235.

                                                    A F F I R M E D.

                                2