Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Luis Enrique CRUZ-VALLES, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-12-11
Citations: 357 F. App'x 160
Docket Number: No. 08-50292
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Luis Enrique CRUZ-VALLES, Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 357
Pages: 160–160

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Luis Enrique CRUZ-VALLES, Defendant—Appellee.
No. 08-50292.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 17, 2009.
Filed Dec. 11, 2009.
George Hardy, Assistant U.S. Attorney, United States Department of Justice, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Robert Russell Henssler, Jr., Esquire, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
The government appeals from the district court's judgment dismissing an indictment that charged Luis Enrique Cruz-Valles with being a deported alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, see United States v. Gonzalez-Valerio, 342 F.3d 1051, 1053 (9th Cir.2003), and we vacate and remand.
The government contends that the judgment must be reversed in light of our intervening decisions in United States v. Marguet-Pillado, 560 F.3d 1078 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 435, 175 L.Ed.2d 298 (2009), and Martinez-Madera v. Holder, 559 F.3d 937 (9th Cir.2009). We agree.
We decline to address Cruz-Valles' argument that Marguet-Pillado and Martinez-Madera should be overruled. See United States v. Lynch, 367 F.3d 1148, 1158 (9th Cir.2004) (per curiam).
We therefore vacate and remand for proceedings consistent with this disposition.
VACATED and REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.