United States v. Cruz Montano-Lorona

MEMORANDUM

Cruz Montano-Lor'ona (“Montano”) appeals his jury conviction for illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (a). His primary defense at trial was that he had acquired derivative citizenship through his father, a United States citizen. We affirm.

1. Montano asserts that the district court absolved the government of its burden to disprove derivative citizenship.. However, “the government does not have the burden of disproving each element of derivative citizenship; only ‘alienage’ is among the elements of [illegal reentry], so only it must be proven.” United States v. Sandoval-Gonzalez, 642 F.3d 717, 724 (9th Cir.2011) (emphasis omitted). Nor did the district court place the burden of proving derivative citizenship on Montano, which was in keeping with the principle that “a-criminal-defendant faces no burden whatsoever regarding the issue of derivative citizenship in a prosecution for an offense of which alienage is an element.” Id. at 723 . Finally, read in context and in light of these principles, the district court’s observation that “there’s no presumption” regarding derivative citizenship was a correct statement of the law. Accordingly, the district court did not…