U.S. v. Arita-Campos

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant's motion to dismiss his indictment on charge of illegal re-entry into U.S. after having been deported, even though defendant challenged his initial 1994 deportation order, which had been entered in absentia, on ground that he had never received notice of 1994 deportation hearing. Defendant failed to establish any of three requirements set forth in section 1326 for setting aside 1994 deportation order, where defendant: (1) failed to file motion to reopen deportation proceeding to assert instant claim; (2) failed to show that he was deprived of opportunity to file habeas proceeding to review immigration judge's legal rulings; and (3) failed to establish viable due process claim in his contention that 1994 deportation order deprived him of opportunity to seek voluntary departure.