United States v. Hernandez-Aguirre

258 F. App'x 662

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Pedro Jaimes-Aguirre (Jaimes) appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for illegal reentry after having previously been deported. Jaimes contends that his sentence is unreasonable because this court’s post-Booker 1 rulings have effectively reinstated the mandatory guidelines regime condemned in Booker. As Jaimes concedes, this argument is foreclosed. See Rita v. United States, — U.S.-,-, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2462, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007).

In light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), Jaimes challenges the constitutionality of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)’s treatment of prior felony and aggravated felony convictions as sentencing factors rather than elements of the offense that must be found by a jury. This court has held that this issue is “fully foreclosed from further debate.” United States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir.2007), cert. denied - U.S. -, 128 S.Ct. 872, 169 L.Ed.2d 737 (2008).

■The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

1 . United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S. Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005).