Lozano v. United States


17-3800 Lozano v. United States of America UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 26th day of February, two thousand nineteen. PRESENT: JON O. NEWMAN, SUSAN L. CARNEY, RICHARD J. SULLIVAN, Circuit Judges. _________________________________________ JIMMY LOZANO, Petitioner -Appellant, v. No. 17-3800-cv UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent- Appellee. _________________________________________ FOR APPELLANT: STEPHANIE M. CARVLIN, Law Office of Stephanie M. Carvlin, New York, NY. FOR APPELLEE: NICHOLAS FOLLY, Asst. U.S. Atty., New York, NY (Anna M. Skotko, Asst. U.S. Atty., New York, NY on the brief), for Geoffrey S. Berman, U.S. Atty. for the Southern District of New York. Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Koeltl, J.). UPON DUE CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the case is REMANDED. Jimmy Lozano appeals from the October 20, 2017, judgment of the District Court for the Southern District of New York (John G. Koeltl, District Judge) denying his motion for a writ of coram nobis to vacate his 2004 conviction for Hobbs Act robbery. He contends that his guilty plea resulting in that conviction was involuntary because the Government affirmatively misrepresented his citizenship status by issuing him a passport and therefore misled him as to the consequences of his plea. His claim arises from the following facts. Lozano was born in the Dominican Republic on February 9, 1981, and entered the United States with his mother and other family members as a lawful permanent resident in 1993 when he was twelve years old. On July 24, 2000, when Lozano was 19, his mother became a naturalized citizen of the United States. One of the requirements for an alien child to acquire United States citizenship is that a parent has become a naturalized citizen before the child has reached the age of 18. See 8 U.S.C. § 1431(a)(2)). Two years later, Lozano applied for a United States passport, and the Department of State issued one to him. A United States passport “ha[s] the same force and effect as proof of United States citizenship as certificates of naturalization or of citizenship issued by the Attorney General or by a court having naturalization jurisdiction.” 22 U.S.C. § 2705(1). 2 In November 2004, Lozano pled guilty to ...

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