United States v. Jose Pineda-Tejada

462 F. App'x 381
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 26, 2012
Docket11-4499
StatusUnpublished

This text of 462 F. App'x 381 (United States v. Jose Pineda-Tejada) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Jose Pineda-Tejada, 462 F. App'x 381 (4th Cir. 2012).

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jose Oscar Pineda-Tejada was convicted, pursuant to a jury trial, of unauthorized reentry by a previously deported alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(2) (2006). Pineda-Tejada timely appealed. We affirm.

On appeal, Pineda-Tejada claims that the district court erred when it instructed the jury that a finding of illegal reentry did not require a finding of specific intent. *382 Pineda-Tejada did not object to the jury instruction at trial, and therefore, this court reviews this issue for plain error. Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1, 8-9, 119 S.Ct. 1827, 144 L.Ed.2d 35 (1999). To obtain a conviction under § 1326, the Government must establish only that: (1) Pineda-Tejada was an alien who was previously arrested and deported; (2) he reentered the United States voluntarily; and (3) he failed to obtain the express permission of the Attorney General to do so. See United States v. Espinoza-Leon, 873 F.2d 743, 746 (4th Cir.1989); see also 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Because the district court’s instructions were consistent with the precedent of this Circuit, we conclude that the jury instructions were not erroneous.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Neder v. United States
527 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court, 1999)
United States v. Enrique Jesus Espinoza-Leon
873 F.2d 743 (Fourth Circuit, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
462 F. App'x 381, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-jose-pineda-tejada-ca4-2012.