UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Carlos AVILA-SIFUENTES, also known as Roberto Avila, also known as Juan Solis-Martinez, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-11110
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
July 31, 2007.
Summary Calendar.
John Steven Bush, Law Office of J. Steven Bush, Fort Worth, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
PER CURIAM:*
Jose Carlos Avila-Sifuentes (Avila) appeals his conviction following a jury trial for illegal reentry after removal from the United States, in violation of
Avila also argues that the admission of the warrant of deportation violated his right of confrontation and Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 124 S.Ct. 1354, 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004), because the warrant was testimonial in nature. This argument is foreclosed by circuit precedent. See United States v. Valdez-Maltos, 443 F.3d 910, 911 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 127 S.Ct. 265, 166 L.Ed.2d 205 (2006).
Avila further challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, specifically arguing that the warrant of deportation was insufficient to prove that he was actually removed from the United States. The testimony at trial showed that the order of deportation in Avila‘s “A” file was dated January 18, 1996, and that an alien is typically deported the same date as the order. The warrant of deportation from Avila‘s immigration file contained Avila‘s signature and thumbprint and the signature of a deportation officer who witnessed the removal. An Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent also testified that if an alien with a completed warrant of deportation form in his file had not been removed, there would be further documentation of the occurrence in the file. A rational juror could conclude from the evidence that Avila was actually removed from the United States. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); see also Quezada, 754 F.2d at 1194-96.
AFFIRMED.