T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on a nd i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by N i nth C i r c ui tR ul e 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l y c onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t a bl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2).

T he H onor a bl e F r e de r i c B l oc k, S e ni orU ni t e d S t a t e s D i s tr i c tJ udge f or *** the E a s t e rn D i s tr i c tof

N e w Y or k, s i tt i ng by de s i gna t i on. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T
UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. AL F R E DO P AD I L L A- VE GA , D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 11- 50122 D . C
. N o. 3: 10 -c r- 00 03 2-B T M -1
ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e S o u th e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia B a rry T . M os kow i t z , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng

S ubm i tt e d A pr i l 10, 2012 ** P a s a d e n a , C a lif

o rn ia B ef ore: F E RN A N D E Z and S IL V E R M A N , C i rc ui tJudg es , and B L O C K , D i stri ct Judg e. *** 

# FI LED APR17 2 012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

O n J a nua ry 6, 2010, A l f r e do P a di l l a - V e ga w a s i ndi c t e d on one c ountof be i ng a deport ed al i en foun d i n the U ni t ed S t at es , i n v i ol at i on of 8 U .S .C
. § 1 32 6. A ft er
un succ es sf

ul l y m ov i ng t o di sm i ss the i nd i ctm ent , he ent er ed a c on di t i on al gu i l ty pl ea , pu rs uantt o w hi ch he w as se nt ence d t o 3 6 m on ths i n p ri son. H e now ap p ea l s that
se nt ence on the g ro un d thathi s pri or depo rt at i on w as i nv al i d. T he di stri ctcourt
r e j e c t e d th i s a r g u me n t . W e a f f i r m. P adi l l a- V ega w as previ ou sl y deport ed on the basi s of bein g co n vi ct ed of an

“ aggravat ed fe l on y. ” See 8 U .S .C
. § 1 2 2 7 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( A ) ( iii)
. H e a r g u e s , h o w e v e r , th a t h is
c o n v ic tio n f

o ra tte m p te d s e x u a l ab u s e o f a m i n o r u n d e r s ta te la w , se e O r . R e v . S ta t. § 1 6 3 .4 2 7 , d id n o t c o n s titu te “s e x u a l ab u s e o f a m in o r ” a s d e f

in e d b y 8 U .S .C . § 11 01 (a )( 43 )( A ). T hu s, he cont ends, the pri or conv i ct i on i s noton e f or an “ aggravat ed f e lo n y .” T h a t c o n te n tio n is in c o rr e c t. P r ope r l y appl y i ng the m odi f i e d c a t e g o ri c a l appr oa c h, the di s tr i c tc our tf ound th e f ac ts o f P ad il la-V eg a’s O re g o n co n v ic ti o n to fit sq u ar ely w ith in th is C ircu it ’s defi ni t i on of “ se xu al abuse of am i no r. ” Se e U n ite d S ta te s v . Me d in a - V

illa , 567 F
. 3d 50 7, 51 3 ( 9th C i r. 20 09 ) (r equi ri ng (1) se xu al cond uct ; (2) w i th a m in o r; (3 ) t hat
co n stitu te s abu se ). P adi l l a- V ega a rgues thatthe Me d in a - V illa de f i ni t i on a nd the
m o d ified ca teg o r ic al ap p ro ac h w er e im p li ed ly o v er rid d en b y th e S u p re m e C o u rt’s opi ni on i n N

i j ha w an v. H

older , 1 2 9 S . C t. 2 2 9 4 , 2 3 0 0 ( 2 0 0 9 ) , w h ic h c ite d in d ic ta to3

thi s C i r c ui t ’ s opi ni on i n Estrada -Espi no za v. Mukasey , 54 6 F
. 3d 11 47 , 11 56 (9th C i r. 2008) ( e n ba nc ) ( di s c us s i ng the de f i ni t i on of “ s e xua l abus e of a m i nor ” )
. B utnothi ng i n N i j haw an , w hi ch det erm i ned w hether aprov i si on for m on et ary l oss w as an “e le m e n t” o f

th e a g g r a v a te d f

r a u d o rd e c e it f

e lo n y a p p e a r in g a t 8 U .S .C . § 11 01 (a )( 43 )( M )( i ), pu rport s t o rej ec tei ther the approach em pl oyed by the di stri ct
c our torthe de f

i ni t i on a dopt e d i n Me d in a - V i l la
. See C arachu ri -R osendo v. H older , 130 S
. C t . 2577, 2 5 8 7 n . 1 1 (2 010) ( the hol di ng i n N i j haw an “ w a s t a i l or e d t o the

‘ c i r c um s t a nc e - s p eci fi c ’ l a ngua ge c ont a i ne d i n [ a ] pa rt i c ul a rs ubs e c t i on of the aggravat ed fe l on y def

i ni t i on ”)
. N ordoe s P a di l l a - V e ga ga i n a ny tr a c t i on f r om a r gui ng tha tthe s t a tut e of
conv i ct i on cove rs an o v erl y broad range of condu ctbecause i tpo t ent i al l y pun i shes
a c ts th a t d o n o t c o n s titu te “s e x a c ts ” o r“a b u s e .” W h e n d e te r m in in g w h e th e ra g u ilty pl e a a dm i t s the e l e m e nt s of a ge ne r i c of

f e n se , c our t s m a y c ons i de r“ the t e r m s of the char gi ng do cum ent ” and “ the t erm s of apl eaagre em ent . ” Sh epard v. U ni t ed Stat es , 5 4 4 U . S. 1 3 , 2 6 ( 2 0 0 5 )
. Th e d i s tr i c tc o u r tap p r o p r i a t e l y r e l i e d u p o n th e d e t a i l e d t e r ms of C ountT hr e e of P a di l l a - V e ga ’ s i ndi c tm e nt , t o w hi c h he pl e d gui l ty , s t a t i ng tha the

“ unl a w f ul l y a nd i nt e nt i ona l l y a tt e m pt e d t o s ubj e c t[ the vi c t i m ] , a pe r s on unde rthe a ge of 14 ye ar s, t o sexual cont ac tby att em pt i ng t o t ou ch her vagi nal ar ea . ”4

Im po rt ant l y, i n thi s C i rc ui t , se xu al cond uctw i th chi l dren youn ger than fou rt ee n years i s “ per s e abusi ve. ” U

ni t e d Stat e s v . V

al e nc i a- B ar r agan , 608 F
. 3d 1103, 1107 ( 9th C i r . 2010)
. B e c a us e P a di l l a - V e ga c om m i tt e d a n “ a ggr a va t e d f e l ony ” a s w e ha ve d e f in e d th a t te r m , h is p r io rd e p o r ta tio n o n th a t g r o u n d w a s v a lid
. H e w a s n o t e lig ib le f o rv o lu n ta ry d e p a r tu r e . A c c o r d in g ly , th e d i s tr ic t c o u r t d id n o t e rrin r e f u s in g to d is m is s th e in d ic tm e n t. AF F I RME D.