United States v. Juan Ramirez-Villalba
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Appellant Juan Manuel Ramirez-Villal-ba (“Ramirez”) appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to dismiss his indictment under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 for attempted reentry after deportation. The denial of such a motion is reviewed de novo where, as here, the motion was based on “due-process defects in [an] underlying deportation proceeding.” United States v. Moriel-Luna, 585 F.3d 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 2009).
Ramirez claims that during the deportation proceedings at issue, the Immigration Judge (“IJ”) never advised him of a potential “extreme hardship” waiver of remova-bility or a humanitarian reinstatement of his immigrant visa petition. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (h); 8 C.F.R. § 205.1 (a)(3)®. According to Ramirez, these errors were prejudicial and violated due process.
To prove prejudice in violation of due process, a defendant must show that “upon a review of the record, it appears ... an IJ could have concluded ... his potential claim[s] for relief’ from removal “would be ‘plausible.’ ” United States v. Pallares-Galan, 359 F.3d 1088, 1103-04 (9th Cir. 2004). Here, neither of Ramirez’s claims would produce a plausible avenue for relief.