United States v. Sanchez-Ledezma

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-20315
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ALFREDO SANCHEZ-LEDEZMA,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-01-CR-601-1
--------------------
February 20, 2003
Before WIENER, EMILIO M. GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Alfredo Sanchez-Ledezma appeals his conviction and sentence
for illegal reentry after deportation following an aggravated
felony conviction. He argues that the district court erred in
determining that his prior conviction for simple possession of a
controlled substance was a “drug trafficking offense” and thus an
“aggravated felony” under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C) (2001). This

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 02-20315
-2-
issue is foreclosed by our recent decision in United States
v. Caicedo-Cuero, 312 F.3d 697, 708-09 (5th Cir. 2002), which
held that simple possession of a controlled substance is a drug
trafficking crime for purposes of the aggravated felony
enhancement of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C) (2001).
Sanchez concedes that his remaining appellate arguments
are foreclosed by this court’s precedent, and he raises them
only to preserve their further review by the Supreme Court.
Caicedo-Cuero reaffirms our prior holding that simple
possession is an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43).
312 F.3d at 706-08. Similarly, the issue whether 8 U.S.C.
§ 1326(b)(1)&(2) are facially unconstitutional in light of
Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), is foreclosed by
Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998). United
States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --