Carlos Perez-Tostado appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for illegal reentry following deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.

For the first time on appeal, PerezTostado contends that the “felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). He also contends that Blakely v. Washington, -U.S.-, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), applies in determining his sentence. Perez-Tostado acknowledges that his arguments are foreclosed, but he seeks to preserve the issues for possible Supreme Court review.

Perez-Tostado’s arguments are not precluded by the terms of the appellate-waiver provision. Nevertheless, as PerezTostado concedes, his arguments are foreclosed. See Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 247, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998); United States v. Pineiro, 377 F.3d 464, 473 (5th Cir. 2004), petition for cert. filed (U.S. July 14, 2004) (No. 04-5263); United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000).

AFFIRMED.