UNITED STATES v. VELOZ ALONZO (2019)

Ricardo Veloz-Alonzo pled guilty to reentering the United States without permission after being deported. See 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). After he entered his plea, the Supreme Court decided Pereira v. Sessions, ––– U.S. ––––, 138 S.Ct. 2105, 201 L.Ed.2d 433 (2018). In due course, the district court entered a judgment of conviction. Veloz-Alonzo argues that in light of Pereira, he is innocent of illegal reentry as a matter of law, so his conviction must be reversed. In his view, because the Notice to Appear that initiated his 2002 removal proceeding omitted a hearing date and time, jurisdiction never vested in the immigration court, and his removal order is invalid.

After briefing in this case concluded, we rejected Veloz-Alonzo’s argument in Santos-Santos v. Barr, 917 F.3d 486 (6th Cir. 2019). Santos-Santos holds that “[n]o references [in the Notice to Appear] to the time and place of the hearing are required to vest jurisdiction” in the immigration court. Id. at 490.

Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment of conviction.

BOGGS, Circuit Judge.