Alonso Dominguez-Castorena (Dominguez) appeals his conviction and sentence for being unlawfully present in the United *627 States after having been removed previously. Dominguez argues that the district court erred by enhancing his sentence pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) based upon the determination that his 2004 convictions under Tex. Penal Code § 21.11(a) for indecency with a child were crimes of violence.

Sexual abuse of a minor is an enumerated offense which qualifies as a crime of violence under § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii). United States v. Zavala-Sustaita, 214 F.3d 601, 604-05 (5th Cir. 2000), held that a violation of § 21.11(a) is sexual abuse of a minor as that term is used in its “ordinary, contemporary, [and] common meaning.” As such, the district court did not plainly err in applying the enhancement under § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii).

In light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), Dominguez also challenges the constitutionality of § 1326(b)’s treatment of prior felony and aggravated felony convictions as sentencing factors rather than elements of the offense that must be found by a jury. This court has held that this issue is “fully foreclosed from further debate.” United States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir. 2007).

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.