Court Opinion

ID: 2657306
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2014-03-20 00:16:03.885666+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:12:41.442510
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                            FILED
                            FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT                             MAR 19 2014

                                                                          MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                            U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                        No. 12-10421

              Plaintiff - Appellee,              D.C. No. 2:10-cr-00289-KJM-1

  v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM*
NICASIO ROMAN,

              Defendant - Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Eastern District of California
                  Kimberly J. Mueller, District Judge, Presiding

                      Argued and Submitted March 10, 2014
                           San Francisco, California

Before: FARRIS, REINHARDT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.

       Nicasio Roman appeals his conviction and sentence for being a deported

alien found in the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He challenges the

district court’s denial of his motion to dismiss his indictment based on alleged due

process violations in his underlying removal proceeding. We have jurisdiction

        *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we review de novo. See United States v. Valdavinos-

Torres, 704 F.3d 679, 685 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm.

      An alien mounting a collateral attack on the underlying removal order

“must, as a threshold matter, show that he exhausted his administrative remedies.”

United States v. Valdavinos-Torres, 704 F.3d 679, 685 (9th Cir. 2012) (quoting

United States v. Villavicencio-Burruel, 608 F.3d 556, 559 (9th Cir. 2010)); see also

8 U.S.C. § 1326(d)(1). Here, the record reflects that Roman appealed the

underlying removal order to the Board of Immigration Appeals, but later dismissed

his appeal. Thus, Roman failed to exhaust his administrative remedies.

      AFFIRMED.

                                         2