United States v. Isidro Hernandez-Ramirez

Good Law
461 F. App'x 557
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 9, 201110-50275, 11-50027California289 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Isidro Hernandez-Ramirez appeals his conviction for attempted reentry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (a). He claims that the district court precluded him from presenting a defense that he had a good faith belief that Uniform Commercial Code documents filed with the California Secretary of State gave him a legal right to enter the United States. We affirm.

The district court did not preclude the defense from presenting evidence or arguing a good faith defense in closing. Rather, it advised defense counsel that it would give a jury instruction explaining that the UCC governs commercial transactions, not immigration law, if defense counsel argued the applicability of the UCC in closing argument. Such an instruction would have been a correct statement of the law. Defense counsel then chose not to make the argument. Our decision in United States v. Smith-Baltiher, 424 F.3d 913 (9th Cir.2005), does not control this case, because in Smithr-Baltiher, the defendant introduced evidence of his mother’s United States citizenship. Id. at 922 & n. 8. In contrast, here, as the district court found, Mr. Hernandez proffered “no evidence” that he had a good faith…

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.