United States v. Rafael Aldana


FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 16-50372 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. v. 3:15-cr-03101- BGS-DMS-1 RAFAEL ALDANA, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Dana M. Sabraw, District Judge, Presiding UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 16-50385 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. v. 3:15-cr-03156- RBB-AJB-1 JULIO CESAR SUAREZ, Defendant-Appellant. OPINION Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Anthony J. Battaglia, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted September 1, 2017 Pasadena, California 2 UNITED STATES V. ALDANA Filed December 29, 2017 Before: William A. Fletcher and Sandra S. Ikuta, Circuit Judges, and Sarah Evans Barker,* District Judge. Opinion by Judge Ikuta SUMMARY** Criminal Law Affirming misdemeanor convictions under 8 U.S.C. § 1325(a)(1) for attempting to enter the United States “at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers,” the panel held that a place “designated by immigration officers” refers to a specific immigration facility, not an entire geographic area. * The Honorable Sarah Evans Barker, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Indiana, 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. ALDANA 3 COUNSEL Doug Keller (argued), Federal Defenders of San Diego Inc., San Diego, California, for Defendants-Appellants. Daniel E. Zipp (argued), Assistant United States Attorney; Helen H. Hong, Chief, Appellate Section, Criminal Division; Alana W. Robinson, Acting United States Attorney; United States Attorney’s Office, San Diego, California; for Plaintiff- Appellee. OPINION IKUTA, Circuit Judge: Rafael Aldana and Julio Cesar Suarez were each convicted of the misdemeanor offense of “attempt[ing] to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers,” in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1325(a)(1). While not disputing that they entered the United States miles away from any established port of entry facility, Aldana and Suarez argue that because the applicable regulations designate entire geographic regions as ports of entry, there was insufficient evidence that they had violated the statute. We conclude that a place “designated by immigration officers” for purposes of § 1325(a)(1) refers to a specific immigration facility, not an entire geographic area, and therefore affirm the district court. I On November 28, 2015, a border patrol surveillance agent observed Rafael Aldana climbing over the fence separating 4 UNITED STATES V. ALDANA the United States and Mexico. A second agent found him hiding in the brush approximately 400 yards north of the border and two miles from the nearest port of entry facility at Otay Mesa, California. Aldana admitted to climbing over the fence and told the border patrol officer that he was a citizen of Mexico and had no documentation that would allow him to enter the United States on a legal basis. Aldana was charged with the misdemeanor offense of “attempt[ing] to enter the United States at any time or place other ...

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