Court Opinion

ID: 44091
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 22:04:36+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:01:10.024334
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 21, 2006

                                                           Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                   Clerk
                             No. 05-40753
                         Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                     Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE GONZALEZ-AGUILAR,

                                     Defendant-Appellant.

                       --------------------
          Appeal from the United States District Court
               for the Southern District of Texas
                      USDC No. 5:04-CR-2488
                       --------------------

Before STEWART, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Jose Gonzalez-Aguilar appeals his guilty-plea conviction and

sentence for illegal reentry into the United States after a

previous deportation.    He argues that the “felony” and

“aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and

(b)(2) are unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey,

530 U.S. 466 (2000).

     Gonzalez-Aguilar’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by

Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998).

     *
       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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 05-40753
                                -2-

Although Gonzalez-Aguilar contends that Almendarez-Torres was

incorrectly decided and that 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).

Gonzalez-Aguilar 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.