United States v. Marcos Cornejo-Macias

MEMORANDUM

Defendant Marcos Cornejo-Macias appeals his conviction for being found in the United States after removal, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (a). He argues that the district court erred by denying his motion to dismiss, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (d), which challenged the validity of the underlying removal order. Reviewing de novo, United States v. Sandoval-Orellana, 714 F.3d 1174, 1178 (9th Cir.2013), we affirm.

Defendant argues that his underlying removal order was invalid because the immigration judge (“IJ”) failed to inform him of the possibility of discretionary relief from deportation under former Immigration and Nationality Act § 212(c). See INS v. St Cyr, 533 U.S. 289, 326 , 121 S.Ct. 2271 , 150 L.Ed.2d 347 (2001) (holding that § 212(c) relief remains available for noncit-izens who pleaded guilty before the law was repealed). But in 1990 and 1991, Congress amended § 212(c) to prohibit discretionary relief for anyone convicted of one or more aggravated felonies who had served at least five years in prison for such felonies. See Immigration Act of 1990, Pub.L. No. 101-649, § 511 (a), 104 Stat. 4978 , 5052 (amending 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (c)); Miscellaneous and…