Record contained sufficient evidence to support defendant-citizen of Mexico’s conviction on charge of re-entering U.S. without permission after having received removal order. While defendant argued that his prior removal order was unlawful because his Notice to Appear was defective due to failure of Notice to contain date and location of initial hearing, case law indicated that agency had jurisdiction to enter prior removal order, where failure of Notice to Appear to contain date and location of hearing was mere claim-processing rule that could be waived or forfeited if not timely asserted. Moreover, defendant failed to meet two of three statutory requirements under 8 USC section 1326(d) for collaterally attacking prior removal order, where defendant could not show that prior removal order was fundamentally unfair, and where defendant failed to move to reopen prior removal proceedings after having been returned to Mexico. Moreover, defendant’s return to U.S. by stealth made it impossible to satisfy section 1326(d), even if agency erred in failing to serve defendant with proper Notice to Appear.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Criminal Court
Immigration