United States v. Alvarado-Pineda

A defendant is not prejudiced by procedural defects in a removal proceeding when defendant is convicted of an aggravated felony that renders him ineligible for relief from an underlying removal order.

Jose Alvarado-Pineda ("Alvarado-Pineda"), a 29-year-old Mexican national, first entered the United States in about 2003. In 2004, he stole a wallet in Seattle, Washington, and was convicted of second-degree robbery in violation of section 9A.56.190 of the Revised Code of Washington and was sentenced to 14 months in prison. Over the next six years, Alvarado-Pineda reentered the United States three times, in 2005, 2006, and 2011. Each time, he was apprehended and charged with illegal reentry. Following his indictment for illegal reentry in 2011 "Alvarado-Pineda moved to dismiss the indictment on the ground that his prior removal orders had been entered in violation of his Fifth Amendment due process rights. The district court denied the motion and, after a bench trial, convicted Alvarado-Pineda of illegal reentry." Alvarado-Pinedo then filed a timely appeal alleging procedural defects in his underlying removal proceedings. The Ninth Circuit held that Alvarado-Pineda's conviction for second-degree robbery accompanied by a term of imprisonment for greater than one year constituted an aggravated felony and as such he was ineligible for relief from removal proceedings. "Because he [was] ineligible for relief, he suffered no prejudice from any procedural defects that may have occurred, and the district court correctly denied his motion to dismiss his indictment." AFFIRMED.