
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Carlos Romeo HERNANDEZ-ESTEBAN, a.k.a. Carlos R. Hernandez, a.k.a. Carlos Roman Hernandez, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-11045
    Non-Argument Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    Sept. 29, 2011.
    
      Peggy Morris Ronca, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Myrna Amelia Mesa, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Orlando, FL, Robert E. O’Neill, David Paul Rhodes, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Tampa, FL, for Plaintiff-Ap-pellee.
    Craig L. Crawford, Donna Lee Elm, James T. Skuthan, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Orlando, FL, for Defendant Appellant.
    Before TJOFLAT, EDMONDSON and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Carlos Romeo Hernandez-Esteban (“Hernandez”) was convicted on a plea of guilty to a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2) (illegal reentry into the United States following a previous deportation), and the district court sentenced him to a prison term of 24 months. He now appeals, raising one argument: the district court imposed a substantively unreasonable sentence by failing to consider sentencing disparities between fast-track and non-fast-track jurisdictions when considering a downward variance from the Guidelines sentencing.

We rejected this argument in United States v. Vegor-Castillo, 540 F.3d 1235 (11th Cir.2008). Vega-Castillo constitutes binding precedent. We are therefore constrained to follow it “unless and until it is overruled by this court en banc or by the Supreme Court.” United States v. Brown, 342 F.3d 1245, 1246 (11th Cir.2003).

AFFIRMED.  