Molina-Valenzuela

United States v. Molina-Valenzuela

Good Law
53 F. App'x 808
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 11, 2002No. 02-50060; D.C. No. CR-00-00214-FMC-01California451 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Following a remand for resentencing, Gustavo Molina-Valenzuela appeals his conviction and sentence for illegal reentry into the United States after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . Molina-Valenzuela contends that the district court erred by denying (1) his motion to dismiss the indictment 1 and (2) his request for a downward departure at sentencing on the basis of outrageous government conduct. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Molina-Valenzuela contends that an agent of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (“INS”) promised him that he would not be charged with illegal reentry if he stipulated to reinstatement of a previous deportation order and waived his right to a deportation hearing. He further contends that the government acted outrageously by breaking this promise and prosecuting him. We disagree.

The district court correctly found that, even if the INS agent actually made the promise, Molina-Valenzuela was not entitled to dismissal of the indictment because he did not establish that the INS agent was authorized to bind the United States Attorney. See United States v. Cordovar-Perez, 65 F.3d 1552, 1554 (9th…

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.