IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-50622
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ARNULFO RODRIGUEZ PEREZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. W-00-CR-100
--------------------
February 20, 2002
Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Arnulfo Rodriguez Perez challenges the sentence he received
following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry into the
United States pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He argues that the
district court erred in imposing an eight-level increase in his
offense level because his prior state conviction for possession
of cocaine was not an aggravated felony under the amended version
of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C). Rodriguez Perez’s argument is
foreclosed by United States v. Hinojosa-Lopez, 130 F.3d 691, 693-
94 (5th Cir. 1997), and United States v. Hernandez-Avalos, 251
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 01-50622
-2-
F.3d 505, 507 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 122 S. Ct. 305 (2001).
The amended version of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 still provides that the
term “aggravated felony” is defined in 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)
without regard to the date of the aggravated felony conviction.
U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, comment. (n.2). Therefore, the amended version
of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2 had no effect on the district court’s
determination of whether Rodriguez Perez’s possession conviction
constitutes an aggravated felony. Further, Rodriguez Perez
received the benefit of the amended version of U.S.S.G.
§ 2L1.2(b)(1)(C) as he received an eight-level increase rather
than the 16-level increase he would have received under the
previous version of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A). He has not shown
that the district court erred in imposing an eight-level increase
in his offense level because his prior possession conviction was
an aggravated felony under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C).
Rodriguez Perez’s appeal is without arguable merit and is
thus frivolous. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir.
1983). Because it is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. 5TH CIR.
R. 42.2.