United States v. Vasquez-De La Vega , 72 F. App'x 952 ( 2003 )

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT August 20, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 02-41365
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
BENITO VASQUEZ-DE LA VEGA,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. L-02-CR-553-ALL
--------------------
Before JONES, WIENER, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Benito Vasquez-De La Vega (“Vasquez”) pleaded guilty to
illegal reentry following deportation, a violation of 8 U.S.C.
§ 1326. Vasquez raises two issues that he concedes are
foreclosed, but he seeks to preserve them for further review.
Vasquez first argues that his prior conviction for
possession of a controlled substance is not an aggravated felony
under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C) (November 1, 2001). This
argument is foreclosed by our decision in United States v.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 02-41365
-2-
Caicedo-Cuero, 312 F.3d 697, 705-11 (5th Cir. 2002), cert.
denied, 123 S. Ct. 1948 (2003).
Vasquez also argues that the sentencing provisions of 8
U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) & (b)(2) are unconstitutional in light of
Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). Vasquez’s argument
is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S.
224, 235, 239-47 (1998). Apprendi did not overrule
Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi, 530 U.S. at 489-90; United
States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000).
AFFIRMED.