Botello-Quinones

*49 MEMORANDUM **

Joel Botello-Quinones appeals the district court’s determination that he violated his terms of supervised release arising out of a 2002 conviction for illegal re-entry. He also appeals his sentence by the district court arising out of his conviction in 2007 for yet another illegal re-entry. See 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . We affirm.

(1) Botello first asserts that' the district court could not find that he violated the terms of his supervised release, which forbade him from illegally reentering this country, because he had not been given a written notice of those terms. It is true that he should have been given a written notice, 1 but because he had actual notice, the failure of the probation officer to give a written notice did not preclude a determination that he had violated the terms. 2 He also asserts that the government did not show by a preponderance of the evidence 3 that he had illegally reentered the country during the supervised release period, but the record demonstrates that there was sufficient, even overwhelming, evidence that he had. The district court did not err when it found a violation and revoked Botello’s supervised release. See United States v.…