
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Octavio WITHRON-ALVAREZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 03-41384.
    Conference Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Decided April 20, 2005.
    James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Roland E. Dahlin, II, Federal Public Defender, Tito H. Alfaro, Aurora Ruth Bearse, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before SMITH, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Octavio Withron-Alvarez appeals his sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry into the United States following deportation. Withron-Alvarez contends that the sentencing enhancements in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are unconstitutional and that he should be re-sentenced for the lesser included offense contained in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Withron-Alvarez acknowledges that his arguments are foreclosed under Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). However, he contends that if Almendarez-Torres is overruled, his sentence should be reconsidered in light of Blakely v. Washington, — U.S.-, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004).

Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000) did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi 530 U.S. at 489-90, 120 S.Ct. 2348; see also United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir.2000). Withron-Alvarez has not demonstrated that Blakely v. Washington, — U.S.-, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004) is applicable to cases arising under Almendarez-Torres. The sentence imposed is AFFIRMED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     