United States v. Garcia-Paulin
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 24145
| 5th Cir. | 2010Background
- Garcia-Paulin pleaded guilty to a §1324(a)(1)(A)(i) charge (aiding and abetting) based on a factual basis alleging he furnished a fraudulent I-551 ADIT stamp to a Mexican national for $15,000 and instructed him to cross illegally; the stamp was fraudulent and did not authorize entry or residence.
- The indictment alleged that the alien had not received prior authorization and that Garcia-Paulin brought or attempted to bring the alien to the United States and that the offense was for financial gain.
- Garcia-Paulin admitted the facts in the factual basis and acknowledged the plea terms; he was arrested on March 24, 2009, after entering the U.S. and waiving rights.
- The district court accepted the guilty plea, convicted Garcia-Paulin, and the case is on appeal challenging the sufficiency of the factual basis to support the §1324(a)(1)(A)(i) conviction.
- The panel vacated the conviction and remanded for further proceedings, holding the factual basis insufficient to prove the charged “bringing” or aiding/abetting conduct under §1324(a)(1)(A)(i).
- The decision relies on Rule 11(b)(3) plain-error review because the sufficiency challenge was raised on appeal for the first time.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the factual basis supports a §1324(a)(1)(A)(i) conviction. | Garcia-Paulin argues the facts show he provided a fraudulent stamp and instructed illegal entry, constituting “bringing.” | Garcia-Paulin contends he did not actively bring or accompany the alien; he provided false documents but did not physically aid entry. | Insufficient factual basis to prove “bringing” or aiding/abetting under §1324(a)(1)(A)(i). |
| Whether the indictment and factual basis adequately establish the charged offense. | Indictment tracks the statute; factual basis supports the offense when read with the indictment. | Indictment and facts do not show Garcia-Paulin actively brought the alien or aided the actual entry. | Indictment and factual basis fail to establish the essential conduct of “bringing.” |
| Whether the error is plain and prejudicial under Rule 11(b)(3) and warrants relief. | — | — | Yes; plain error affecting substantial rights; conviction vacated and remanded. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Marek, 238 F.3d 310 (5th Cir.2001) (compare conduct to elements of the offense; determine adequate factual basis)
- United States v. Castro-Trevino, 464 F.3d 536 (5th Cir.2006) (Rule 11(b)(3) factual-basis requirement; protect voluntary plea from misalignment with law)
- United States v. Washington, 471 F.2d 402 (5th Cir.1973) (bringing requires active conduct; accompanying or guiding across border supports bringing)
- United States v. Singh, 532 F.3d 1053 (9th Cir.2008) (aiding and abetting requires aiding a principal; cannot aid only the alien)
- United States v. Adams, 961 F.2d 505 (5th Cir.1992) (indictment must allege facts tying defendant to the offense; mere statutory language is insufficient)
- United States v. Boatright, 588 F.2d 471 (5th Cir.1979) (indictment or information must contain sufficient facts to support the plea)
- United States v. Bachynsky, 949 F.2d 722 (5th Cir.1991) (illustrates use of indictment as factual basis when adequately specific)
- United States v. Wishart, 582 F.2d 236 (2d Cir.1978) (conviction for bringing based on assisting/entering with false papers)
- United States v. Yoshida, 303 F.3d 1145 (9th Cir.2002) (bringing where defendant guided and escorted aliens to aircraft)
- United States v. Aguilar, 883 F.2d 662 (9th Cir.1989) (false papers and escorting support bringing)
- United States v. Anaya, 509 F.Supp.289 (S.D.Fla.1980) (illustrates distinction between bringing and encouraging/inducing)