
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Manuel GONZALEZ, also known as Miguel Castaneda, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 02-21032.
    Conference Calendar
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Aug. 20, 2003.
    James Lee Turner, Assistant US Attorney, US Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, Mark Michael Dowd, US Attorney’s Office, Brownsville, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Roland E. Dahlin, II, Federal Public Defender, H. Michael Sokolow, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before JONES, WIENER, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Manuel Gonzalez appeals his guilty plea conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute five kilograms re of cocaine. Gonzalez argues that 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a) and (b) were rendered facially unconstitutional by Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). Gonzalez concedes that his argument is foreclosed by our opinion in United States v. Slaughter, 238 F.3d 580, 581-82 (5th Cir.2000) (revised opinion), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1045, 121 S.Ct. 2015, 149 L.Ed.2d 1015 (2001), which rejected a broad Apprendi-based attack on the constitutionality 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, Gonzalez’s argument is foreclosed.

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       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     