Case ID: f-appx_203/html/0138-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Pedro Ivan AGUILAR-QUINONEZ, aka John Doe, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 05-50387.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Oct. 16, 2006.
    
    Filed Oct. 18, 2006.
    Ellyn M. Lindsay, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Criminal Division, Los An-geles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Davina T. Chen, Esq., Federal Public Defender’s Office, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: T.G. NELSON, W. FLETCHER, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, appellant’s request for oral argument is denied as moot.
    
   MEMORANDUM

Pedro Ivan Aguilar-Quinonez appeals from the 77-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for being an illegal alien found in the United States after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm, and remand with instructions to correct the judgment.

Aguilar-Quinonez contends that his Fifth Amendment rights were violated by the imposition of a condition of supervised release that requires him to report to a United States probation officer within 72 hours of reentering the United States. This contention is foreclosed by United States v. Rodriguez-Rodriguez, 441 F.3d 767, 771-73 (9th Cir.2006).

Aguilar-Quinonez also contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) is facially unconstitutional. This argument is foreclosed by United States v. Velasquez-Reyes, 427 F.3d 1227, 1229 (9th Cir.2005), and United States v. Weiland, 420 F.3d 1062, 1079 n. 16 (9th Cir.2005).

In accordance with United States v. Riv-erctr-Sanchez, 222 F.3d 1057, 1062 (9th Cir. | 2000), we remand the case to the district court with instructions that it delete from the judgment the reference to § 1326(b)(2). See United States v. Herrera-Blanco, 232 F.3d 715, 719 (9th Cir. 2000) (remanding sua sponte to delete the reference to § 1326(b)).

AFFIRMED; REMANDED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.