Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Hugo Araugo-Gutierrez raises arguments that are foreclosed by United States v. Young, 981 F.2d 180, 187 (5th Cir. 1992), which held that hearsay is admissible for sentencing purposes, including corroborated out-of-court statements by unidentified confidential informants, and thus that its admission does not violate due process or the right to confrontation. Araugo-Gutierrez also raises arguments that are foreclosed by United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 519 (5th Cir.), cert. denied 546 U.S. 828, 126 S.Ct. 43, 163 L.Ed.2d 76 (2005), which held that, after United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), the sentencing court may still find all facts relevant to sentencing by a preponderance of the evidence. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.