Quintana-Gamez

United States v. Quintana-Gamez

Good Law
616 F. App'x 288
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 8, 201514-50208California440 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

The government charged German Quin-tana-Gámez- with illegal reentry into the United States under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (a), (b)(2). Quintana-Gamez moved to dismiss the indictment, alleging that his prior re moval order was invalid because, at the hearing, he was not afforded an opportunity to seek voluntary departure. The district court denied the motion, holding that even if Quintana-Gamez had been given a chance to request voluntary departure, he would have been ineligible for that relief because of his 2001 aggravated felony conviction.

The INA defines “aggravated felony” as including a “crime of violence ... for which the term of imprisonment [is] at least one year.” 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (a)(43)(F). Corporal injury of a spouse, in violation of California Penal Code § 273.5, is a “crime of violence,” which Quintana-Gamez does not dispute. “[T]erm of imprisonment,” in turn, refers to the “period of incarceration or confinement ordered by a court of law regardless of any suspension of the imposition or execution of that imprisonment.” M'§ 1101(a)(48)(B).

Under these definitions, Quintana-Ga-mez’s 2001 conviction plainly constitutes an…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.