Ballardo-Villapudua

MEMORANDUM **

Fidel Ballardo-Viallapudua appeals from the 46-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for violating 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Ballardo-Villapudua first contends that his enhancement under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (b)(2) is unconstitutional. That contention is foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s holding in Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 250 , 118 S.Ct. 1219 , 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (9th Cir.1998). Bal-lardo-Villapudua asserts that recent Supreme Court cases have undermined Al-mendarezTorres. As we explained in United States v. Weiland, 420 F.3d 1062 (2005), “[although recent Supreme Court jurisprudence has perhaps called into question the continuing viability of Almen-darez-Torres, we are bound to follow a controlling Supreme Court precedent until it is explicitly overruled by that Court.” Id. at 1079 n. 16 (internal citation omitted). Accordingly, we reject Ballardo-Villapu-dua’s contention that 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (b)(2) is unconstitutional.

He next contends that the district court plainly erred in imposing a condition of supervised release requiring him to “submit to 1 drug test within 15…