Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Fabian ZAVALA-ICIDA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-09-14
Citations: 201 F. App'x 494
Docket Number: No. 05-50461
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Fabian ZAVALA-ICIDA, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before: PREGERSON, T.G. NELSON, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 201
Pages: 494–495

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Fabian ZAVALA-ICIDA, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 05-50461.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 11, 2006.
Filed Sept. 14, 2006.
Kevin M. Kelly, Esq., Garrett M. Heenan, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Frederick M. Carroll, Esq., Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: PREGERSON, T.G. NELSON, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Fabian Zavala-Icida appeals from his conviction for being a deported alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, United States v. Ubaldo-Figueroa, 364 F.3d 1042, 1047 (9th Cir.2004), and affirm.
Appellant contends that the district court improperly denied his motion to dismiss the indictment due to an invalid prior removal. We disagree and conclude that the district court properly denied the motion. See id. at 1048.
Even assuming that appellant was denied the opportunity for judicial review of his prior removal proceedings, he was statutorily precluded from receiving cancellation of removal because he had already been granted such relief once before. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229(b)(6); Maldonado-Galindo v. Gonzales, 456 F.3d 1064, 1067-69 (9th Cir.2006). Accordingly, appellant failed to demonstrate that the underlying removal order was fundamentally unfair or that he suffered prejudice as a result. See Ubaldo-Figueroa, 364 F.3d at 1048.
AFFIRMED.
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.