IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-40463
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
BERNALDO BASILO JAIMES-JAIMES,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. L-99-CR-1082-1
- - - - - - - - - -
February 15, 2001
Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Bernaldo Basilo Jaimes-Jaimes (Jaimes) appeals his guilty-
plea conviction and sentence for illegal reentry after
deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). Jaimes argues
that the indictment was deficient for failing to allege his prior
felony conviction as an element of the offense. Thus, he
contends that he was improperly sentenced based on this prior
conviction. Jaimes concedes that this argument is foreclosed by
the Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres v. United
States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), and raises it solely to preserve
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 00-40463
-2-
Supreme Court review. As we recently noted, the Supreme Court
expressly declined to overrule Almendarez-Torres in Apprendi v.
New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), thus we are bound to follow this
precedent. See United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th
Cir. 2000), petition for cert. filed, (U.S. Jan. 26, 2001)
(No. 00-8299).
Jaimes also asserts for the first time on appeal that the
indictment was deficient because it did not allege general intent
as an element of the offense. This argument is foreclosed by our
decision in United States v. Guzman-Ocampo, 236 F.3d 233 (5th
Cir. 2000).
AFFIRMED.