With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Jose De Jesus Castro-Ramirez appeals his 74-month sentence imposed following a guilty plea conviction for illegally reentering the United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742. We affirm. Castro-Ramirez contends that the district court improperly increased his sentence because: (1) Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000) overruled Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998) (<HOLDING>); and (2) the district erred by failing to

A: holding any fact other than a prior conviction that increases the maximum penalty beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to the jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt
B: holding that any fact other than a prior conviction may not be used to enhance a defendants sentence beyond the statutory maximum unless it is submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt
C: holding that sixth amendment not violated when sentence enhanced based on prior convictions that were not charged in indictment or admitted by defendant
D: holding that a sentence may be enhanced based on a prior conviction that was not alleged in the indictment admitted on the record or proved beyond a reasonable doubt
D.