United States v. Adrian Ortiz-Lopez

Good Law
385 F.3d 1202·2004 WL 2240594·2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 20865
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 6, 200403-10339California1,620 words

Opinion

Opinion

Adrian Ortiz-Lopez challenges his conviction under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 for illegal reentry into the United States following removal. He bases his challenge on a collateral attack on the underlying removal. Ortiz-Lopez argues, and the government agrees, that in his removal proceeding the Immigration Judge (“IJ”) did not inform him that he was eligible for a fast-track voluntary departure under 8 U.S.C. § 1229c(a)(l). We conclude that the district court erred in finding that because Ortiz-Lopez’s previous California conviction for cocaine possession was an “aggravated felony,” Ortiz-Lopez could not have been prejudiced by the IJ’s failure to inform him about relief from removal. We reverse and remand for further proceedings.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Ortiz-Lopez is a Mexican national who first entered the United States without admission or parole in 1994. On April 25, 2000, he was convicted in San Mateo County, California, for felony possession of a controlled substance, a violation of Cal. Health & Safety Code § 11350 (a). His California conviction was based on possession of cocaine. Shortly thereafter, Ortiz-Lopez received a notice to appear from the then-immigration and…

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.