               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT



                           No. 01-10198
                         Summary Calendar



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                         Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

FRANCISCO VILLARREAL-FLORES,
also known as Francisco Flores-Villarreal,
also known as Frank Flores,
also known as Frank Villareal,

                                         Defendant-Appellant.

                       --------------------
           Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Northern District of Texas
                      USDC No. 3:00-CR-ALL-P
                       --------------------
                          August 6, 2001

Before JOLLY, WIENER, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Francisco Villarreal-Flores appeals the 60-month sentence

imposed following his plea of guilty to a charge of being found

in the United States after deportation, a violation of 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326.   He contends that the felony conviction that resulted in

his increased sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) was an element

of the offense that should have been charged in the indictment.




     *
        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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 01-10198
                                -2-

     Villarreal-Flores 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 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 Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 121 S. Ct. 1214 (2001).

Villarreal-Flores’ argument is foreclosed.   The judgment of the

district court is AFFIRMED.

     The Government has moved for a summary affirmance or

dismissal of the appeal.   The motion is GRANTED to the extent

that summary affirmance is requested.
