United States v. Romero-Hernandez

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED October 25, 2007 No. 06-41288 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. ADRIAN ROMERO-HERNANDEZ Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:06-CR-526-1 Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Adrian Romero-Hernandez appeals his conviction and sentence following his plea of guilty to one count of unlawful reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b). Romero-Hernandez first contends that his 46-month sentence, which was within the properly calculated sentencing guidelines range, was unreasonable. According to Romero-Hernandez, this court’s application of a presumption of reasonableness to within-guidelines sentences effectively renders * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 06-41288 the Guidelines mandatory in contravention of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005). Romero-Hernandez’s argument is foreclosed by circuit and Supreme Court precedent. See United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 553-54 (5th Cir. 2006); see also Rita v. United States, 127 S. Ct. 2456, 2463-68 (2007). In light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), Romero- Hernandez also challenges the constitutionality of § 1326(b)’s treatment of prior felony and aggravated felony convictions as sentencing factors rather than elements of the offense that must be found by a jury. This court has held that this issue is “fully foreclosed from further debate.” United States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir. 2007), petition for cert. filed (Aug. 28, 2007) (No. 07-6202). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 2