Robert Wayne Montgomery appeals the sentence he received after he pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm. Montgomery argues that, because the gun was not loaded and evidence of drug dealing or drug-related activities was not present, the district court erred *212 when it increased his base offense level under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(5). Inasmuch as Montgomery does not contest that he had a prior felony or that he possessed a firearm in a bag with cocaine, his argument is unavailing. See United States v. Condren, 18 F.3d 1190, 1199-2000 (5th Cir. 1994); United States v. Washington, 340 F.3d 222, 231 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 1081, 124 S.Ct. 942, 157 L.Ed.2d 757 (2003) .

Montgomery’s argument that the district court committed plain error when it enhanced his sentence based on facts not alleged in the indictment, proven to a jury, or proven beyond a reasonable doubt, in violation of Blakely v. Washington, — U.S.-, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004) , is foreclosed. See United States v. Pineiro, 377 F.3d 464, 465-66 (5th Cir. 2004), petition for cert. filed (U.S. July 14, 2004)(No. 04-5263).

Montgomery’s sentence is AFFIRMED.