United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
March 8, 2006
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-41375
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-
Appellee,
versus
MARTIN LOPEZ-SANCHEZ,
Defendant-
Appellant.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 5:04-CR-393-ALL
----------------------------------------------------------------
Before BARKSDALE, STEWART and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges
PER CURIAM:*
Martin Lopez-Sanchez (Lopez) appeals his conviction and sentence for illegal reentry
following deportation. Lopez argues that the district court committed reversible error under United
States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), by sentencing him pursuant to a mandatory application of the
Sentencing Guidelines. The Government concedes that Lopez has preserved this issue for appeal.
*
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be
published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.
The Government, however, has not shown beyond a reasonable doubt that the error was harmless.
See United States v. Walters, 418 F.3d 461, 463-64 (5th Cir. 2005). Accordingly, Lopez’s sentence
is vacated, and this case is remanded for resentencing.
He also argues that the “felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1)
and (b)(2) are unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). Lopez’s
constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235
(1998). Although Lopez contends that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a
majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi, we have
repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding. See United
States v. Garza-Lopez, 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). Lopez
properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit
precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review.
CONVICTION AFFIRMED; SENTENCE VACATED; REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.
-2-