Singh

MEMORANDUM **

Balbir Singh appeals his conviction and resulting 18-month sentence for bank fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344 . Singh contends that the district court erred at the change of plea hearing by failing to inform him that he had the continued right to the assistance of counsel, in violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1), and by failing to inform him that he may be ordered to pay restitution. Singh contends that his guilt plea and restitution order must therefore be vacated.

*750 The government argues that the appeal is moot and that Singh did not authorize the present arguments on appeal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , vacate the judgment of conviction and sentence, and remand.

The government argues that Singh cannot show any collateral consequences from his conviction. It is undisputed that Singh has served his sentence and is not presently subject to any supervised release provisions, because he has been deported to India. Singh’s appeal is not moot, however, because he is challenging both his sentence and his conviction, and we presume that collateral consequences attend most criminal convictions. See United States v.…