                                                       United States Court of Appeals
                                                                Fifth Circuit
                                                             F I L E D
               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                December 17, 2004

                                                          Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                  Clerk
                            No. 04-50495
                        Conference Calendar


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                    Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RAYMONDO CONTRERAS-VELASQUEZ, also known as Ernesto
Contreras, also known as Javier Ramirez, also known as
Javier Ramirez Contreras, also known as Raymundo Leon Contreras,

                                    Defendant-Appellant.

                       --------------------
          Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Western District of Texas
                    USDC No. 1:04-CR-19-ALL-SS
                       --------------------

Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Raymondo

Contreras-Velasquez raises arguments that are foreclosed by

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

which held that a prior conviction is a sentencing factor under 8

U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) and not a separate criminal offense, and by

United States v. Pineiro, 377 F.3d 464, 465-66 (5th Cir. 2004),

petition for cert. filed (U.S. July 14, 2004) (No. 04-5263),

which held that Blakely v. Washington, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004),

     *
       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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 04-50495
                               -2-

does not apply to the United States Sentencing Guidelines.   The

Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the

judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
