Granados-Mondragon

ORDER

This case is ordered resubmitted effective today.

MEMORANDUM **

It is “settled law in this circuit that a guilty plea may be used to establish *696 issue preclusion in a subsequent civil suit.” United States v. Section 18, 976 F.2d 515, 519 (9th Cir.1992); see also United States v. $31,697.59 Cash, 665 F.2d 908, 904 (9th Cir.1982); United States v. Bejar-Matrecios, 618 F.2d 81, 83-84 (9th Cir.1980); Ivors v. United States, 581 F.2d 1362 , 1367 (9th Cir.1978). Granados argues that Haring v. Prosise, 462 U.S. 306 , 103 S.Ct. 2368 , 76 L.Ed.2d 595 (1983), limited the doctrine of collateral estoppel to issues that are “actually litigated,” as opposed to plea-bargained. Id. at 316 . Haring , however, merely clarified that the doctrine “precludes the litigation of only those issues necessary to support the judgment entered in the first action.” Id. at 315 , 103 S.Ct. 2368 (emphasis added). That Granados entered the United States without inspection was a predicate for his conviction under 8 U.S.C. § 1325 . Granados is consequently estopped from relitigating this issue in his deportation proceedings.

Granados also contends that the fact of his conviction alone is insufficient to…