sentence. See United States v. Taylor, 100 Fed.Appx. 305, 307 (5th Cir.2004) (per curiam) (unpublished). Following our judgment, Taylor filed a petition for certiorari, in which he challenged for the first time the constitutionality of the Sentencing Guidelines as applied to him. Having reconsidered our decision pursuant to the Supreme Court’s instructions, we reinstate our judgment affirming the conviction and sentence. We recently held in United States v. Hernandez-Gonzalez, 405 F.3d 260 (5th Cir.2005), that, absent extraordinary circumstances, we will not consider Booker issues raised for the first time in a petition for rehearing. See also United States v. Sutherland, 428 F.2d 1152, 1158 (5th Cir.1970) (per curiam); United States v. Ardley, 273 F.3d 991 (11th Cir.2001) (en banc) (<HOLDING>). It would be illogical for this court, absent
holding that supreme court would not consider issue not mentioned either in petition for rehearing or in petition for certiorari even though matter was argued before it holding that even a remand by the supreme court for reconsideration in light of an intervening court opinion does not require the court to consider an argument raised for the first time in a petition for certiorari holding that supreme court need not consider issue not raised in petition for certiorari holding it is settled that the supreme court may consider questions raised on the first appeal after which the court denied a petition for a writ of certiorari as well as those that were before the court of appeals upon the second appeal after which the court granted a petition for a writ of certiorari internal quotation marks omitted holding that the court did not have jurisdiction to consider an argument not presented to the board in a motion for reconsideration