United States v. Hinojosa-Aguirre

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 21, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 03-40559 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus REYNALDO HINOJOSA-AGUIRRE, Defendant-Appellant. -------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. L-02-CR-1700-1 -------------------- Before JOLLY, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Reynaldo Hinojosa-Aguirre appeals his guilty plea conviction for possession with intent to distribute 3,4-Methylenedioxy Methamphetmine. Hinojosa-Aguirre argues that 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) and (b) were rendered facially unconstitutional by Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). Hinojosa-Aguirre concedes that his argument is foreclosed by our opinion in United States v. Slaughter, 238 F.3d 580, 581-82 (5th Cir. 2000), which rejected a broad Apprendi-based attack on the constitutionality * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 03-40559 -2- of that statute. He raises the issue only to preserve it for Supreme Court review. A panel of this court cannot overrule a prior panel’s decision in the absence of an intervening contrary or superseding decision by this court sitting en banc or by the United States Supreme Court. Burge v. Parish of St. Tammany, 187 F.3d 452, 466 (5th Cir. 1999). No such decision overruling Slaughter exists. Accordingly, Hinojosa-Aguirre’s argument is foreclosed. AFFIRMED.