Rodolfo Antonio Rodriguez pleaded guilty to illegal reentry following deportation, a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Rodriguez raises two issues that he concedes are foreclosed, but he seeks to preserve them for further review.

Rodriguez argues that his prior conviction for possession of a controlled substance is not an aggravated felony under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(C). This argument is foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Caicedo-Cuero, 312 F.3d 697, 705-11 (5th Cir. 2002), cert, denied, — U.S. —, 123 S.Ct. 1948, 155 L.Ed.2d 864 (2003).

Rodriguez argues that the sentencing provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (b)(2) are unconstitutional in light of Ap prendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). Rodriguez’s argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235, 239-47, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000).

AFFIRMED.