United States v. Daniel Rodriguez-Perez

MEMORANDUM

Daniel Rodriguez-Perez appeals from his conviction for illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 , arguing that the district court erred in denying his motion to dismiss the indictment, which had collaterally attacked his underlying removal order. See 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (d). We review a denial of such a motion de novo. See United States v. Leon-Paz, 340 F.3d 1003, 1004 (9th Cir.2003). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and affirm.

Rodriguez-Perez was found in the United States in 2011 after having been removed in 2007 pursuant to a reinstatement of a deportation order issued in 1995. Rodriguez argues that the immigration judge in his 1995 hearing erred by advising him that he was ineligible for relief from deportation under former Section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. An immigrant seeking relief under Section 212(c) was statutorily required to have a “lawful unrelinquished domicile of seven consecutive years,” 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (c) (1995), and in Castillo-Felix v. INS, 601 F.2d 459 (9th Cir.1979), this Court upheld a BIA interpretation whereby “to be eligible for [Section 212(c) ] relief, aliens must accumulate seven years of lawful…