FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 20-50010 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. v. 3:19-mj-23798- RNB-CAB-1 MANUEL MELGAR-DIAZ, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 20-50011 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. v. 3:19-mj-23597- RNB-CAB-1 JOAQUIN BENITO-MENDOZA, Defendant-Appellant. OPINION Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Cathy Ann Bencivengo, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted May 12, 2021 Pasadena, California Filed June 29, 2021 2 UNITED STATES V. MELGAR-DIAZ Before: Jay S. Bybee and Daniel A. Bress, Circuit Judges, and Kathleen Cardone, * District Judge. Opinion by Judge Bress SUMMARY ** Criminal Law Affirming convictions for entering the United States at a time or place other than as designated by immigration officers in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1325(a)(1), the panel held that § 1325(a)(1) does not violate the non-delegation doctrine, and is not unconstitutionally vague—facially or as applied. COUNSEL Doug Keller (argued), Law Office of Doug Keller, San Diego, California, for Defendant-Appellant Manuel Melgar- Diaz. Kara Hartzler, Federal Defenders of San Diego Inc., San Diego, California, for Defendant-Appellant Joaquin Benito- Mendoza. * The Honorable Kathleen Cardone, United States District Judge for the Western District of Texas, sitting by designation. ** This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader. UNITED STATES V. MELGAR-DIAZ 3 Zachary J. Howe (argued), Assistant United States Attorney; Daniel E. Zipp, Chief, Appellate Section, Criminal Division; Robert S. Brewer, Jr., United States Attorney; United States Attorney’s Office, San Diego, California; for Plaintiff- Appellee. OPINION BRESS, Circuit Judge: The defendants in this case pleaded guilty to entering the United States from Mexico at a time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1325(a)(1). Defendants argue that § 1325(a)(1) is an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power to immigration officials and is void for vagueness. We hold that these constitutional challenges fail. I. Manuel Melgar-Diaz, a Mexican citizen, crossed the border from Mexico in 2019. He did not enter at a designated port of entry. A border agent arrested Melgar- Diaz about five miles north of the U.S. border after the agent briefly chased him. In 2019, border agents also arrested Joaquin Benito-Mendoza, a Mexican citizen, after he entered the United States at a location other than a port of entry. Agents found Benito-Mendoza hiding in brush just north of the border, approximately eighteen miles from a port of entry. Before a magistrate judge, the defendants pleaded guilty without plea agreements to misdemeanor illegal entry under 8 U.S.C. § 1325(a)(1). That statute punishes any alien who “enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or 4 UNITED STATES V. MELGAR-DIAZ place other than as designated by immigration officers.” 8 U.S.C. § 1325(a)(1). Both defendants were sentenced to time served and were released. Despite pleading guilty, defendants appealed their convictions to the district court. They advanced various constitutional challenges to their convictions, which the …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals