                                                       United States Court of Appeals
                                                                Fifth Circuit
                                                             F I L E D
               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                  April 12, 2006

                                                          Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                  Clerk
                            No. 05-41075
                        Conference Calendar



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                    Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JORGE LUIS HERRERA-RESENDEZ,
also known as Luis Alberto Gassoso-Herrera,

                                    Defendant-Appellant.

                        --------------------
           Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Southern District of Texas
                     USDC No. 1:04-CR-1021-ALL
                        --------------------

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Jorge Luis Herrera-Resendez appeals his guilty plea

conviction and sentence for illegal reentry into the United

States.   He argues that the “felony” and “aggravated felony”

provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (2) are unconstitutional

in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000).       His

constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v.

United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998).   Although Herrera-

Resendez contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided

     *
       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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 05-41075
                                -2-

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).   Herrera-

Resendez 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.   Because Herrera-

Resendez has shown no error in the judgment of the district

court, that judgment is AFFIRMED.
