United States v. Jesus Valdez-Novoa
780 F.3d 906
| 9th Cir. | 2014Background
- Valdez-Novoa, a native and citizen of Mexico, entered the U.S. without inspection in 1983 and never obtained legal status.
- In 1999 an IJ deemed him removable due to an aggravated felony and prohibited reentry; he was removed to Mexico four days later.
- Over the next decade he repeatedly reentered and was removed pursuant to the 1999 order.
- On February 16, 2011, Valdez-Novoa attempted to reenter at San Ysidro using an identification document bearing another person’s name purchased in Mexico.
- At trial the government introduced a videotaped interview in which he admitted the misconduct and his prior removals and lack of permission to reenter.
- He was convicted of attempted illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and sentenced to seventy months’ imprisonment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 1999 removal order is valid under § 1326(d) | Valdez-Novoa argues IJ failed to inform apparent relief eligibility. | Government contends any error was non-prejudicial or inapplicable due to ineligibility. | Removal order valid; no prejudice shown under § 1326(d)(3). |
| Whether the evidence satisfies corpus delicti for attempted illegal reentry | Confession alone suffices with corroboration. | Independent corroboration required; confession insufficient without corpus delicti. | Sufficient independent corroboration established; corpus delicti satisfied. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Gracidas-Ulibarry, 231 F.3d 1188 (9th Cir. 2000) (defines gravamen of attempted illegal reentry; requires specific intent)
- Lopez-Alvarez, 970 F.2d 583 (9th Cir. 1992) (corpus delicti: corroborate confession with independent evidence)
- Corona-Garcia, 210 F.3d 973 (9th Cir. 2000) (corpus delicti requires corroboration of gravamen; gravamen is core conduct)
- Barajas-Alvarado, 655 F.3d 1077 (9th Cir. 2011) (plausibility standard for prejudice in § 1326(d)(3))
- Ubaldo-Figueroa, 364 F.3d 1042 (9th Cir. 2004) (prejudice prong requires plausible grounds for relief)
- Rojas-Pedroza, 716 F.3d 1253 (9th Cir. 2013) (applies § 1326(d)(3) prejudice framework)
- Gonzales-Figeroa, 2006 WL 729784 (BIA 2006) (Board discretion in voluntary departure with criminal histories)
- In re Ortiz-Bustos, 2014 WL 1652408 (BIA 2014) (board remand and discretionary relief considerations)