USA V. J. VEGA-ARROYO, No. 10-50395 (9th Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 31 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 10-50395 D.C. No. 3:09-cr-02798-DMS v. MEMORANDUM * J. JESUS VEGA-ARROYO, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Dana M. Sabraw, District Judge, Presiding Submitted December 19, 2012 ** Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges. J. Jesus Vega-Arroyo appeals from the district court s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction for attempted entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). we affirm. Vega-Arroyo contends that the district court erred by denying his motion to dismiss the indictment. He asserts that his underlying removal order is defective because his waiver of his right to counsel in the removal proceedings was ineffective. We review this claim de novo. See United States v. Reyes-Bonilla, 671 F.3d 1036, 1042 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 133 S. Ct. 322 (2012). Vega-Arroyo was required to prove actual prejudice in relation to his claim of ineffective waiver of his right to counsel, because he had a prior aggravated felony conviction at the time of the removal proceedings. See id. at 1049. Because Vega-Arroyo made no attempt to prove actual prejudice, the district court properly denied his motion to dismiss the indictment. AFFIRMED. 2 10-50395