United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                   ___________

                                   No. 06-2560
                                   ___________

United States of America,               *
                                        *
             Appellee,                  *
                                        * Appeal from the United States
      v.                                * District Court for the
                                        * Western District of Missouri.
Thomas Charles Goodfellow,              *
                                        *      [UNPUBLISHED]
             Appellant.                 *
                                   ___________

                             Submitted: April 27, 2007
                                Filed: May 7, 2007
                                 ___________

Before RILEY, MAGILL, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.
                            ___________

PER CURIAM.

       Thomas Charles Goodfellow (Goodfellow) pled guilty to bank robbery, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). Designating him as a career offender, see U.S.S.G.
§ 4B1.1, the district court1 sentenced Goodfellow to 151 months’ imprisonment and
3 years’ supervised release.

      Goodfellow now argues, as he did below, that the enhancement of his sentence
based on previous convictions that were neither charged in the indictment, nor proved

      1
       The Honorable Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr., Chief Judge, United States District
Court for the Western District of Missouri.
to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, violated the Sixth Amendment. Upon our de
novo review, see United States v. Buckner, 

, 978 (8th Cir. 1990) (de
novo review of constitutional issues), we find this argument unavailing. See
Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 

, 246 (1998) (holding sentence-
enhancing previous convictions need not be proved to jury); see, e.g., United States
v. Perry, 

, 786 (8th Cir. 2006) (rejecting Sixth Amendment challenge to
district court's determination defendant had two previous controlled-substance
offenses); United States v. Torres-Alvarado, 

, 810 (8th Cir. 2005)
(stating “we are bound by Almendarez-Torres until the Supreme Court explicitly
overrules it”).

      We affirm the judgment of the district court.
                      ______________________________




                                        -2-