United States v. Hinojosa-Aguirre

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 21, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-40559
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
REYNALDO HINOJOSA-AGUIRRE,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. L-02-CR-1700-1
--------------------
Before JOLLY, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Reynaldo Hinojosa-Aguirre appeals his guilty plea conviction
for possession with intent to distribute 3,4-Methylenedioxy
Methamphetmine. Hinojosa-Aguirre argues that 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)
and (b) were rendered facially unconstitutional by Apprendi v.
New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). Hinojosa-Aguirre concedes
that his argument is foreclosed by our opinion in United States
v. Slaughter, 238 F.3d 580, 581-82 (5th Cir. 2000), which
rejected a broad Apprendi-based attack on the constitutionality

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 03-40559
-2-
of that statute. He raises the issue only to preserve it for
Supreme Court review. A panel of this court cannot overrule a
prior panel’s decision in the absence of an intervening contrary
or superseding decision by this court sitting en banc or by the
United States Supreme Court. Burge v. Parish of St. Tammany, 187
F.3d 452, 466 (5th Cir. 1999). No such decision overruling
Slaughter exists. Accordingly, Hinojosa-Aguirre’s argument is
foreclosed.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --