United States v. Santillan-Villa

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
April 22, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-40975
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JUAN SANTILLAN-VILLA,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. L-02-CR-144-ALL
--------------------
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Juan Santillan-Villa (Santillan) appeals the sentencing
following his guilty-plea conviction for being found in the
United States after having been deported. Santillan contends
that the district court did not comply with FED. R. CRIM.
P. 32(c)(3)(A) at sentencing. The court asked Santillan whether
he had discussed the presentence report with defense counsel, and
Santillan has not established plain error. See United States v.

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 02-40975
-2-
Esparza-Gonzalez, 268 F.3d 272, 274 (5th Cir. 2001), cert.
denied, 535 U.S. 991 (2002).
Santillan also contends that the sentence-enhancing
provisions contained in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are facially
unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466
(2000). Santillan acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed
by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but
seeks to preserve the issue for further review.
Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,
530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984
(5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres
“unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule
it.” Dabeit, 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and
citation omitted). Accordingly, the judgment of the district
court is AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --