United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT February 15, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 05-11166
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RAMIRO PACHECO, also known as Ramiro Pacheco, Jr.,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:05-CR-84-ALL
--------------------
Before DeMOSS, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Ramiro Pacheco appeals his illegal reentry conviction and
sentence. Pacheco’s constitutional challenge to 8 U.S.C.
§ 1326(b) is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States,
523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). Although Pacheco contends that
Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a majority of
the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of
Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), we have repeatedly
rejected such arguments on the basis that Almendarez-Torres
remains binding. See United States v. Garza-Lopez, 410 F.3d 268,
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 05-11166
-2-
276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). Pacheco
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.
Pacheco’s argument that the sentencing disparities created
by U.S.S.G. § 5K3.1’s fast-track sentencing program rendered his
sentence unreasonable is foreclosed by United States v. Aguirre-
Villa, 460 F.3d 681, 682 (5th Cir.), pet. for cert. filed (Nov.
13, 2006) (06-7792). Finally, Pacheco has not established under
plain error review that restricting the fast-track program to
only certain geographic locations results in due process and
equal protection violations.
AFFIRMED.