Cisneros-Vasquez

MEMORANDUM **

Alejandro Cisneros-Vasquez appeals his guilty plea conviction for unlawful reentry by a deported alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (a) and (b) (2001). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm in part and remand for further proceedings.

We review de novo the adequacy of a Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule 11 plea hearing, including the adequacy of the plea colloquy. United States v. Seesing, 234 F.3d 456, 459 (9th Cir.2001). “Because a guilty plea is an admission of all the elements of a formal criminal charge, it cannot be truly voluntary unless the defendant possesses an understanding of the law in relation to the facts.” United States v. Smith, 60 F.3d 595, 597 (9th Cir.1995) (quoting McCarthy v. United States, 394 U.S. 459, 466 , 89 S.Ct. 1166 , 22 L.Ed.2d 418 (1969)).

Cisneros-Vasquez argues that Rule 11 was violated because during his plea colloquy he “expressed doubt as to whether or not his prior removal was valid.” Howev *697 er, “Rule 11 does not require a court, before accepting a guilty plea, to enumerate for the defendant every possible defense and ground for appeal that she or he is foregoing by pleading guilty.” United…