Rodolfo Acosta-Orellana appeals his sentence following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Acosta-Orel-lana argues that the district court erroneously characterized his state conviction for simple possession of heroin as an aggravated felony, which increased his offense level by eight pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(C). We review Acosta-Orel-lana’s challenge to the district court’s application of the Sentencing Guidelines de novo. See United States v. Villegas, 404 F.3d 355, 359-61 (5th Cir. 2005).

In the light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Lopez v. Gonzales, — U.S.—, 127 S.Ct. 625, 166 L.Ed.2d 462 (2006), Acosta-Orellana’s argument has merit. See United States v. Estrada-Mendoza, 475 F.3d 258, 259-61 (5th Cir. 2007). Accordingly, Acosta-Orellana’s sentence is vacated, and the case is remanded for resentencing in light of Lopez.

CONVICTION AFFIRMED; SENTENCE VACATED AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.