Hernandez-Galaviz

MEMORANDUM **

Daniel Hernandez-Galaviz appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to dismiss an indictment charging him with a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 . HernandezGalaviz asserted that indictment was based on an invalid underlying deportation order. After the district court denied his motion, Hernandez-Galaviz pled guilty to two counts of illegal entry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1325 , but reserved his right to appeal.

The sole issue presented is whether Hernandez-Galaviz was prejudiced by the immigration judge’s (“U’s”) failure to advise him that he was eligible to apply for § 212(c) relief. 1 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

An alien charged with a § 1326 violation may collaterally attack a final “deportation order that constituted an element of a criminal offense.” United States v. Herrera-Blanco, 232 F.3d 715, 718 (9th Cir. 2000); see also United States v. Arrieta, 224 F.3d 1076, 1079 (9th Cir.2000) (“[T]he validity of the deportation may be collaterally attacked in the criminal proceeding.”). To prevail on a collateral attack, an alien must show that the underlying deportation proceeding violated his right to due process and…