Martinez-Andrade

United States v. Martinez-Andrade

Good Law
88 F. App'x 168
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 4, 2004No. 03-30187; D.C. No. CR-02-00175-MACalifornia647 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Joel Martinez-Andrade appeals his conviction and sentence for illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . As the parties are familiar with the facts, procedural history, and arguments, we will not recount them here. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Martinez-Andrade first argues that the district court erred in denying his motion to dismiss the indictment because he was denied due process at his underlying deportation hearing, a claim we review de novo. United States v. Muro-Inclan, 249 F.3d 1180, 1182 (9th Cir.2001), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 879 , 122 S.Ct. 180 , 151 L.Ed.2d 125 (2001). We agree with the district court that there was no due process violation in the defendant’s deportation hearing. Martinez-Andrade was properly advised of his ability to apply for a waiver of deportation and his right to appeal. He was individually addressed and was given additional time to fill out the application as well as to seek an attorney. There is no indication at all from the record that Martinez-Andrade asked the Immigration Judge (IJ) to explain further, or that there were any translation problems. He knowingly and intelligently chose deportation…

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.