CRIMINAL LAWUSA v. SALAZAR-ROBLES (3/21/00 - No. 9910194)

 FindLaw | Legal Professionals | Students | Business | Public | News E-mail@Justice.com | MY FindLaw 
FindLaw.com for Legal Professionals  
 Cases & Codes | Forms | Legal Subjects | Federal | State | Library | Boards Law Firm FirmSites | Lawyer Jobs | CLE 

  Lawyer Search        


 

 

FindLaw: Laws: Cases and Codes: 9TH CIRCUIT COURT Opinions

Email a Link to This Case
http://laws.findlaw.com/9th/9910194.html

 

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

USA v SALAZAR ROBLES
9910194

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
No. 99-10194
Plaintiff-Appellee,
D.C. No.
v.
CR-98-00221-MLS
ADAN SALAZAR-ROBLES,
OPINION
Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Milton L. Schwartz, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted
February 14, 2000--San Francisco, California

Filed March 21, 2000

Before: Mary M. Schroeder, John T. Noonan, and
A. Wallace Tashima, Circuit Judges.

Opinion by Judge Noonan

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

John P. Balazs, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Sacra-
mento, California, for the defendant-appellant.

Robin R. Taylor, Assistant United States Attorney, Sacra-
mento, California, for the plaintiff-appellee.

_________________________________________________________________
OPINION

NOONAN, Circuit Judge:

Adan Salazar-Robles appeals his conviction of being a
deported alien found in the United States without the consent
of the Attorney General in violation of 8 U.S.C.S 1326. His
appeal presents a single issue: does venue for the prosecution
of this offense lie where the alien is involuntarily found?
Holding that Salazar-Robles was properly prosecuted in the
Eastern District of California where an agent of the Immigra-
tion and Naturalization Service (the INS) found him in state
prison, we affirm the judgment of conviction.

FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS

Salazar-Robles was deported from the United States on
December 8, 1993; on September 6, 1995; on April 23, 1996;
on June 21, 1997; and on December 12, 1997. On February
5, 1998, he was arrested by state authorities in Orange
County, California for state parole violations. He was con-
victed and incarcerated and transported by state authorities
from Orange County in the Central District of California to
Folsom State Prison in the Eastern District.

On May 7, 1998, he was encountered by an INS agent at
Folsom and interviewed. He admitted that he was a citizen of
Mexico illegally in the United States. On September 11, 1998,
he was indicted for two counts of illegal entry in violation of
8 U.S.C. S 1325(a)(1) and for being a deported alien found in
the United States in the Eastern District of California in viola-
tion of S 1326.

Before trial, Salazar-Robles submitted a proposed jury
instruction that to find him guilty of the S 1326 violation the
jury must find that his presence in the Eastern District was
"voluntary." The court rejected the instruction. The case pro-
ceeded to trial. At the close of the government's case, Salazar-
Robles moved for acquittal. The motion was denied. The jury
found him guilty on all counts. He again moved for acquittal
on the ground of insufficient evidence and on the ground of
improper venue. The motion was denied, and he was sen-
tenced to 17 months imprisonment, 3 years supervised
release, and a special assessment of $100.

Salazar-Robles appeals his conviction of violation of
S 1326.

ANALYSIS

[1] Salazar-Robles's appeal may be read in two ways:
either as a contention that venue was improper because he did
not voluntarily commit the crime in the Eastern District, or
that the government did not prove an element of the crime
because "being found," had to be the result of a voluntary act.
Either way, Salazar-Robles loses. Venue was proper. A viola-
tion of S 1326 has only two elements and both elements of the
crime -- illegal return and being found -- were established.

The argument is earnestly advanced that to be guilty of a
crime you must perform a voluntary act and that, when the
crime consists in part in being found somewhere, you must
have voluntarily put yourself in the forbidden place. As
Salazar-Robles did not voluntarily put himself in Folsom
State Prison, he did not voluntarily commit the act which
completes the crime of being a deported alien found in the
United States. Q.E.D.

[2] The argument is neat and not without attractiveness; but
it won't wash. Salazar-Robles did voluntarily return to the
United States, for at least the fifth time after five deportations.
The offense was completed by his being discovered; but his
discovery did not have to be voluntary. "Being found" is an
element of the offense; but it is a passive state, not requiring
proof of a voluntary act. The voluntary element consisted in
Salazar-Robles's return. Two other circuits have already
found venue proper in a district in which an alien is found
after being brought there involuntarily as a result of incarcera-
tion. See United States v. Herrara-Ordones, 190 F.3d 504,
511 (7th Cir. 1999); United States v. Asibor, 109 F.3d 1023,
1037 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 
522 U.S. 902
 (1997). In United
States v. Ortiz-Villegas, 49 F.3d 1435, 1437 (9th Cir.), cert.
denied, 
516 U.S. 845
 (1995), this court reaffirmed its "long-
standing rule that violation of S 1326 requires only a general
intent to reenter the United States." We reasoned that "[i]ntent
to be in the United States at the moment he or she is located
is not necessary." Id.

Two other cases relate to this conclusion. In United States
v. Guzman-Bruno, 27 F.3d 420, 422-23 (9th Cir. 1994), we
held that for Sentencing Guideline purposes the date a S 1326
offense is deemed to be committed is the date of the alien's
discovery by the INS. In United States v. Hernandez, 189
F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 1999), we held that for an alien, first
discovered by the INS in Oregon, venue for prosecution lay
in Oregon; subsequent prosecution in Washington was
improper for lack of venue. The present case rounds out the
series: an alien is to be prosecuted in the district the offense
is completed by his discovery, be he there willy-nilly.

AFFIRMED.


 

  FindLaw.com LEGAL NEWS:  Top Headlines · Supreme Court · Commentary · Crime · Cyberspace · International
US FEDERAL LAW:  Constitution · Codes · Supreme Court Opinions · Circuit Opinions
US STATE LAW:  State Constitutions · State Codes · Case Law
RESEARCH:  Dictionary · Forms · LawCrawler · Library · Summaries of Law
LEGAL SUBJECTS:  Constitutional · Intellectual Property · Criminal · Labor · more...
GOVERNMENT RESOURCES:  US Federal · US State · Directories · more...
INTERNATIONAL RESOURCES:  Country Guides · Trade · World Constitutions · more...
COMMUNITY:   Message Boards · Newsletters · Greedy Associates Boards
TOOLS:  Office · Calendar · CLE · Email · FAX · West WorkSpace · FirmSite

 
Advertising Info · Add URL · Help · Comments Jobs@FindLaw · Site Map
Company | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer