United States Ninth Circuit

Defendant's conviction for illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. section 1326 is affirmed where: 1) defendant had already been convicted in 2009, of violating section 1326 based on the same 2006 removal order that formed the predicate for the conviction in this case; 2) because it was undisputed in the district court or on appeal that the defendant left the U.S. after his 2009 conviction, there was no error, much less plain error, in the district court's refusal to vacate the defendant's conviction based on a double jeopardy defense; and 3) defendant's collateral attack on the validity of the 2006 removal order fails, because the failure of the immigration officer who interviewed the defendant at the border to inform him of his ability to request withdrawal of his application of admission did not violate his due process rights.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/19/2013
• Published 06/19/2013

Judges

• WATFORD

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel