Jose Luis Amparo-Hernandez appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for deported alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Amparo-Hernandez contends that the district court violated his constitutional rights in enhancing his sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) and § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(i) of the advisory Sentencing Guidelines based on a prior criminal conviction that was neither proved beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury nor admitted as part of the guilty plea and that Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), is no longer good law. This contention is foreclosed by this Court’s case law. See United States v. Delaney, 427 F.3d 1224 1226 (9th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Moreno-Hemandez, 419 F.3d
holding that the fact of a prior conviction for sentencing purposes need not be proved to a jury or admitted by defendant to satisfy the sixth amendment holding that for sentencing purposes the government does not need to allege a defendants prior conviction or prove the fact of a prior conviction where that fact is not an element of the present crime holding that a sentencing court may determine the nature of a prior conviction without violating the sixth amendment holding that defendants sixth amendment right to trial by a jury was not violated by district courts reliance on his prior convictions for purposes of sentencing as career offender holding that there is no sixth amendment right to jury sentencing