United States v. Jose Arnolfo Calles-Pineda

Good Law
627 F.2d 976·1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 14168
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 12, 198079-1720California969 words

Opinion

Opinion

Jose Calles-Pineda appeals his conviction for entering the United States after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . We affirm.

Calles-Pineda defended by collaterally attacking on due process grounds the two deportations underlying the section 1326 charge. A well-established Ninth Circuit rule permits such a defense in criminal prosecutions. United States v. Rangel-Gonzales, 617 F.2d 529, 530 (9th Cir. 1980); United States v. Gasca-Kraft, 522 F.2d 149, 152 (9th Cir. 1975). The government challenges the validity of our rule in light of Lewis v. United States, 445 U.S. 55 , 100 S.Ct. 915 , 63 L.Ed.2d 198 (1980), precluding collateral attack upon the underlying felony convictions in a prosecution under 18 U.S.C. App. § 1202(a)(1) for possession of firearms by a convicted felon. We do not reach this issue, however, because we conclude that, regardless of the propriety of collateral attack in the present context, Calles-Pineda has failed to assert due process violations sufficient to invalidate the underlying deportations.

Calles-Pineda alleges five respects in which his due process rights were violated in each of the two deportation proceedings: (1) a single hearing was…

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.