Ceja-Lopez

*11 MEMORANDUM *

Salvador Ceja-Lopez appeals from the judgment of conviction on a two-count indictment for attempted reentry after deportation, and illegal reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (a). He also appeals from the sentence. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (a), and we affirm the conviction, but vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing. Ceja-Lopez raises two contentions on appeal. We address each seriatim.

I

Ceja-Lopez first contends that his plea of guilty should be vacated because the district court did not comply with the requirements of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 in taking and accepting his plea. We review this contention for plain error because Ceja-Lopez did not object to the plea colloquy in the district court, and we reject it. Even assuming arguendo that the magistrate judge did not correctly explain each of the elements of each count, or failed to establish a complete factual basis for the plea to each count, Ceja-Lopez has not explained how either alleged Rule 11 failure prejudiced him. 1 In order to show prejudice under the plain error standard, as applied to a Rule 11 proceeding, a…