Arroyo-Bernal

United States v. Arroyo-Bernal

Good Law
32 F. App'x 441
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 21, 2002No. 01-50243; D.C. No. CR-00-00861-GAFCalifornia382 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Javier Arroyo-Bernal appeals his 77-month sentence imposed following conviction by guilty plea for illegal reentry after *442 deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Arroyo-Bernal contends that the district court erred by not advising him that an element of the crime is that he was “found in” the United States. Until the Supreme Court’s recent decision in United States v. Vonn, we reviewed de novo whether a district court’s plea colloquy with the defendant satisfied Rule 11. Under Vonn, a defendant who fails to object to a Rule 11 error in trial court must show plain error. See United States v. Vonn, — U.S.- 122 S.Ct. 1043, 1046 , — L.Ed.2d - (2002). However, we find under either standard that there was no Rule 11(c)(1) violation.

Section 1326 criminalizes three distinct acts committed by aliens who have been deported: entering, attempting to enter, and being found in the United States. United States v. Pacheco-Medina, 212 F.3d 1162, 1165 (9th Cir.2000). Arroyo-Bernal was charged with being found in the United States. Being “found” is an element of the crime. United States v. Salazar-Robles,…

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.