United States v. Rojas-Arevalo
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
We have held that violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 is a “continuing offense which continues so long as the alien remains in the country.”1 Thus, Rojas-Arevalo’s violation of § 1326 continued until January 1999, well after the effective date of the 1996 amendment to the definition of “aggravated felony.”2 Therefore, the district court correctly applied the amended definition of “aggravated felony” in calculating RojasArevalo’s sentence.3
Nothing in Valderrama-Fonseca v. INS
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
10 F. App'x 634 (United States v. Rojas-Arevalo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.