United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 18-3363 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Jesus Pineda Ramirez lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Davenport ____________ Submitted: September 27, 2019 Filed: June 25, 2020 ____________ Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________ KOBES, Circuit Judge. Jesus Pineda Ramirez appeals his conviction for illegal reentry after removal, 8 U.S.C. §§ 1326(a) & (b)(2). He argues his removal was invalid because the Government never explained its intent to remove him in Spanish and, as a result, he was denied the opportunity to challenge his status as an aggravated felon and to seek pre-conclusion voluntary departure under 8 U.S.C. § 1229c(a)(1). Because we agree with the district court1 that it was not reasonably likely that an Immigration Judge would have granted his request for voluntary departure, we affirm. I. Pineda Ramirez, a Mexican citizen, came to the United States illegally between 1993 and 1995 and settled in North Carolina. He spoke little English. In 2005, he was convicted of two counts of “assum[ing] the position of a parent in the home of a minor victim [and] engag[ing] in vaginal intercourse . . . with [that] victim,” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-27.7, and was sentenced to 25 to 39 months in prison. While in prison, Pineda Ramirez received a visit from an immigration enforcement officer. Because he was not a legal permanent resident and because the officer determined that Pineda Ramirez’s convictions were aggravated felonies under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43), the officer found him eligible for expedited removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1228(b) and gave him a “Notice of Intent to Issue a Final Administrative Removal Order” in English. The notice indicated that Pineda Ramirez had “been convicted of an aggravated felony” and that he “waive[d] [the] right to . . . contest the above charges.” A checked box further indicated that a translator had “explained and/or served this Notice of Intent to the alien in the Spanish language,” but the two lines where the interpreter was supposed to put his or her information were blank. Pineda Ramirez was removed in February 2008. Almost ten years later, the Government discovered Pineda Ramirez in Iowa and charged him with illegal reentry after removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1326(a) & (b)(2). He moved to dismiss his indictment under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(d) because the Notice of Intent prior to his 2008 removal was never explained to him in Spanish. He argued that he was prejudiced because this prevented him from challenging the 1 The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. -2- Government’s decision to classify him as an aggravated felon, and therefore deprived him of the opportunity to seek voluntary departure instead of being removed by the Government. The district court denied Pineda Ramirez’s motion, holding that he failed to satisfy § 1326(d)’s third requirement for a collateral ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals