United States v. Alonzo Quintanilla-Gonzalez

MEMORANDUM

Alonzo Quintanilla-Gonzalez (“Appellant”) appeals his conviction, after entry of a conditional guilty plea, under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (a) and (b) for attempted entry after deportation. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Appellant claims that his deportation orders are invalid and therefore may not serve as the basis for prosecution under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . In order to challenge the validity of a deportation order, Appellant must demonstrate that: (1) he exhausted available administrative remedies; (2) he was improperly deprived of the opportunity for judicial review; and (3) “the entry of the order was fundamentally unfair.” 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (d); see also United States v. Ramos, 623 F.3d 672, 680 (9th Cir.2010). A removal order is fundamentally unfair if the defendant’s due process rights were violated and he suffered prejudice as a result of the flawed proceeding. See Ramos, 623 F.3d at 680 (quoting United States v. Pallares-Galan, 359 F.3d 1088, 1095 (9th Cir.2004)).

Appellant was first deported in 2001, after the immigration judge (“IJ”) erroneously concluded that his battery conviction rendered him an aggravated felon ineligible for…