Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendants’ motions to dismiss their indictments for illegal reentry into U.S. after having been removed in violation of 8 USC section 1326(a), even though both defendants had attacked their prior in absentia removals under 8 USC section 1326(d) based on defective notices to appear (NTA) for removal proceedings that had failed to set forth time for said removal proceedings. Defendants failed to exhaust their administrative remedies as required under section 1326(d), where defendants failed to move to reopen their removal proceedings as soon as they had become aware of their removal orders. Ct. rejected defendants’ claims that immigration judge had duty to inform them of motion to reopen remedy, or that their brief detentions in ICE prior to their removal made filing of motion to reopen not feasible. Ct. further noted that catching of errors in deficient NTAs would not have led to non-discretionary relief from removal, where officials could have issued new compliant NTA if either defendant had alerted them to deficient NTA.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Criminal Court
Immigration