United States v. Rafael Erenio Izquierdo


USCA11 Case: 18-15345 Date Filed: 04/05/2021 Page: 1 of 10 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 18-15345 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 1:18-cr-20785-PCH-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus RAFAEL ERENIO IZQUIERDO, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ________________________ (April 5, 2021) Before GRANT, LUCK, and EDMONDSON, Circuit Judges. USCA11 Case: 18-15345 Date Filed: 04/05/2021 Page: 2 of 10 PER CURIAM: Rafael Izquierdo appeals his conviction after pleading guilty to unlawful procurement of naturalization and citizenship, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1425(a). No reversible error has been shown; we affirm. Izquierdo is a native of Cuba who became a lawful permanent resident of the United States and a naturalized citizen on 30 September 2016. As part of the naturalization process, Izquierdo completed an Immigration Form N-400, Application for Naturalization (“Application”). By signing the Application, Izquierdo certified under penalty of perjury that the information on the Application was true. In response to Part 11, Question 22 on the Application -- “[h]ave you EVER committed, assisted in committing, or attempted to commit, a crime or offense for which you were NOT arrested?” -- Izquierdo answered “No.” Izquierdo confirmed this answer two more times: during an August 2016 interview for naturalization, and on his Immigration Form N-455, Notice of Naturalization Oath Ceremony. 2 USCA11 Case: 18-15345 Date Filed: 04/05/2021 Page: 3 of 10 In 2017, Izquierdo was convicted after pleading guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud: a conspiracy that was ongoing between January 2014 and January 2017. Given the dates of the wire fraud conspiracy -- and contrary to Izquierdo’s responses during his naturalization proceedings in 2016 -- Izquierdo had committed and was continuing to commit crimes and offenses for which he had not been arrested. Based on Izquierdo’s false representations under oath during the naturalization process, Izquierdo was charged with unlawful procurement of naturalization and citizenship, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1425(a). I. On appeal, Izquierdo contends his guilty plea was not entered knowingly and voluntarily. As a result, he says the plea proceedings deprived him of due process and failed to comply with the requirements of Fed. R. Crim. P. 11. Because Izquierdo challenges the adequacy of his plea proceedings for the first time on appeal, we review his arguments only for plain error. See United States v. Moriarty, 429 F.3d 1012, 1018 (11th Cir. 2005) (when not raised in the district court, both constitutional objections to a plea and objections based on Fed. 3 USCA11 Case: 18-15345 Date Filed: 04/05/2021 Page: 4 of 10 R. Crim. P. 11 are subject to plain error review). Under the plain-error standard, the defendant must show “(1) error, (2) that is plain, and (3) that affects substantial rights.” Id. at 1019. An error is “plain” if it is “clear” or “obvious.” United States v. Gonzalez, 834 F.3d 1206, 1218 (11th Cir. 2016). To show that a plain error affected substantial rights …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals