[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
JUNE 8, 2006
No. 05-11037
THOMAS K. KAHN
CLERK
D. C. Docket No. 04-20606 CR-MGC
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
MERCEDES SUAREZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
(June 8, 2006)
Before DUBINA and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges, and MILLS*, District Judge.
PER CURIAM:
________________________
*Honorable Richard Mills, United States District Judge for the Central District of Illinois, sitting
by designation.
Appellant Mercedes Suarez (“Suarez”) appeals her 24-month sentence
imposed after a jury convicted her of one count of using unauthorized access
devices, 18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(2), and two counts of using a false social security
number in a credit card application, 42 U.S.C. § 408(a)(7)(B). On appeal, Suarez
argues that the district court violated her ex post facto, due process and indictment
clause rights by sentencing her under an advisory, as opposed to a mandatory
guidelines regime.
The issues presented on appeal are (1) whether the district court’s
imposition of sentence and retroactive application of Booker violated ex post facto
and due process principles; and (2) whether the district court’s retroactive
application of Booker1 violated the defendant’s Fifth Amendment indictment
clause right.
“We review constitutional challenges to a sentence de novo.” United States
v. Chau, 426 F.3d 1318, 1321 (11th Cir. 2005).
After reviewing the record and reading the parties’ briefs, we affirm
Suarez’s sentence based on our recent cases of United States v. Thomas, No. 05-
14151 (11th Cir. Apr. 26, 2006) and United States v. DeArmas, No. 05-11896
1
United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005).
2
(11th Cir. May 8, 2006), where we rejected the same arguments Suarez makes
here.
AFFIRMED.
3