IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-20274
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JOSE RAFAEL PARDO,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-99-CR-405-1
--------------------
April 10, 2002
Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jose Rafael Pardo appeals his guilty-plea conviction and
sentence for conspiracy and aiding and abetting to possess with
intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine, in
violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 & 846, and 18 U.S.C. § 2. Pardo
argues that, in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466
(2000), 21 U.S.C. § 841 is unconstitutional. Pardo acknowledges
that this court has rejected his argument and asserts that he
raises the issue solely to preserve it for possible Supreme Court
review. As Pardo concedes, the constitutionality of 21 U.S.C.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 01-20274
-2-
§ 841 has been upheld by this court. See United States v.
Slaughter, 238 F.3d 580, 582 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 532
U.S. 1045 (2001).
Pardo also argues that this court should remand his case to
the district court with instructions to “correct” the judgment to
reflect the district court’s post-sentence remission of the $200
special assessment. The district court’s post-sentence order
remitting the special assessment effectively revised the judgment
of sentence. The entry of a revised judgment to reflect the
post-sentence order is therefore unnecessary and does not require
this court’s intervention.
AFFIRMED.