
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jesus OCEGUEDA-URIBE, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 04-10334.
    D.C. No. CR-03-00408-KJD.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Jan. 10, 2005.
    
    Decided Jan. 13, 2005.
    Robert A. Bork, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Las Vegas, NV, for PlaintiffAppellee.
    Arthur L. Allen, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before BEEZER, HALL, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Jesus Ocegueda-Uribe appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to illegal reentry of a deported alien in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.

Jesus Ocegueda-Uribe’s contention that the entire federal Sentencing Guidelines are unconstitutional under Blakely v. Washington, — U.S. -, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), is foreclosed by United States v. Ameline, 376 F.3d 967, 981-82 (9th Cir.2004) (declining invitation to declare Guidelines as a whole unconstitutional after Blakely).

Jesus Ocegueda-Uribe’s contention that the district court erred under Blakely by applying a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) for a prior crime of violence, without proof to a jury or an admission by Barrera-Galan, is foreclosed by United States v. Quintana-Quintana, 383 F.3d 1052 (9th Cir.2004) (order) (observing that Blakely preserved the rule that a § 2L1.2 sentencing enhancement based on a prior conviction need not be presented to a jury).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
     