United States v. Jesus Pargas-Gonzales

MEMORANDUM

Defendant Jesus Pargas-Gonzales appeals the district court’s entry of criminal judgment. Reviewing de novo “the district court’s denial of a motion to dismiss an indictment under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 when the motion is based on an alleged deprivation of due process in the underlying removal proceedings,” United States v. Villavicencio-Burruel, 608 F.3d 556, 559 (9th Cir.2010), we affirm.

The district court correctly held that the entry of the 2006 removal order was not “fundamentally unfair.” 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (d)(3). We need not decide whether Defendant’s conviction under California Penal Code section 12021(a)(1) (2005) categorically qualifies as an “aggravated felony” pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (a)(2)(A)(iii), because it qualifies under the modified categorical approach.

We may consider the police reports, because Defendant stipulated to them in state court as a factual basis for his plea of no contest. United States v. Almazan-Becerra, 537 F.3d 1094, 1097-99 (9th Cir.2008). The 23 pages of police reports almost all pertain to Defendant’s possession of the handgun in question and to his use of it, specifically, his accidental discharge of the handgun, wounding the leg of…