Court Opinion

ID: 24048
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 08:17:33+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:04:05.153321
License: Public Domain

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 00-40370
                        Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                         Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

FRANCISCO SAUCEDA,

                                         Defendant-Appellant.

                      --------------------
          Appeal from the United States District Court
               for the Southern District of Texas
                     USDC No. M-99-CR-621-1
                      --------------------
                         April 12, 2001

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Francisco Sauceda appeals the 77-month sentence imposed

following his guilty plea to a charge of attempted illegal

reentry into the United States following deportation, a violation

of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.   He contends that the aggravated-felony

conviction that resulted in his enhanced sentence under 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(b)(2) was an element of the offense that should have been

alleged in the indictment.   Sauceda acknowledges that his

argument is foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s decision in

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

     *
        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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 00-40370
                                -2-

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

the decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000).

     Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres.   See United

States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000), cert.

denied, 121 S. Ct. 1214 (2001).   Sauceda’s argument is

foreclosed.   The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.