*665 MEMORANDUM **

Alfredo Portillo-Escalante appeals from the 77-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being an alien in the United States after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Portillo-Escalante contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. In light of the totality of the circumstances and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, the bottom-of-the-Guideline sentence is substantively reasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007).

Portillo-Escalante further contends that his prior conviction sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(D) is per se unreasonable. His argument is foreclosed. See United States v. Barsumyan, 517 F.3d 1154, 1159 (9th Cir. 2008) (policy-based argument against the Guidelines must be asserted on the ground that its operation in a particular case results in a sentence that is unreasonable under § 3553(a)).

Lastly, Portillo-Escalante’s contention that imposition of his 16-level enhancement is an Apprendi violation is foreclosed. See Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998).

AFFIRMED.