*1 Before JOLLY, JONES, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: [*]
Antonio Loredo-Torres appeals his sentence following his guilty plea conviction for illegal entry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1325.
Loredo-Torres argues that the district court erred when it relied on information contained in the presentence report (PSR) to enhance his base offense level pursuant to U.S.S.G.
§ 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(vii) based on a determination that he had a prior conviction for an alien smuggling offense committed for *2 No. 04-40116
-2- profit. He concedes that his argument is foreclosed by United States v. Sanchez-Garcia, 319 F.3d 677, 678 (5th Cir.) cert. denied, 124 S. Ct. 311 (2003), which held that, to determine whether a defendant’s prior conviction satisfied U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(vii), the district court was not limited to consideration of conduct charged in the indictment but could go beyond the statute of conviction and the charging instrument. Sanchez-Garcia forecloses Loredo-Torres’ argument, and the district court did not err by considering the PSR to determine whether to apply U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(vii).
Loredo-Torres also argues that the district court erred when it applied U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(vii) because transportation of illegal aliens is not “alien smuggling.” Loredo-Torres concedes that this claim is foreclosed by United States v. Solis- Campozano, 312 F.3d 164, 167-68 (5th Cir. 2002), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 991 (2003), in which this court held that the term “alien smuggling offense,” as used in U.S.S.G.
§ 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(vii), includes the offense of transporting aliens within the United States. Based on Solis-Campozano, the 16-level increase to Loredo-Torres’ offense level was not error.
The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
[*] Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.