United States District Court, D. Idaho
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
Lynn Winmill U.S. District Court Judge
the Court is Defendant Eduardo Ernesto Gonzalez-Sanchez's
Motion to Dismiss the Indictment (Dkt. 21). For the reasons
explained below, the Court will grant the motion and dismiss
is charged with a single count of illegal reentry. The
indictment alleges that Gonzalez-Sanchez was removed from the
United States in 2015, but the motion focuses on a 2006
removal proceeding. As defendant explains, the 2015 removal
proceeding was a reinstatement of the 2006 removal and as
such “is only as good as the 2006 removal; it cannot
independently sustain an illegal reentry prosecution . . .
.” See Motion, Dk. 21 at 2 n.2 (citing
United States v. Arias-Ordonez, 597 F.3d
972, 978 (9th Cir. 2010)).
2006 removal proceedings began on January 14, 2006, when
immigration authorities served Gonzalez-Sanchez with a Notice
to Appear. The notice ordered Gonzalez-Sanchez to appear
before an immigration judge in El Centro, California at a
date and time “to be set.” The removal hearing
took place roughly three weeks later, on February 6, 2006.
hearing began as a group session. The Immigration Judge (IJ)
addressed several individuals who had been arrested and
charged with entering the United States illegally. The IJ
explained the charges and advised the group as to the purpose
of the hearing:
The purpose of today's hearing is very simple. It's
to decide if this charge is true or false. If the charge is
false and you are entitled to be in the United States,
I'll terminate the proceedings and I'll dismiss the
case. On the other hand, if the charge is true, I will
consider you for any type of relief or permission available
to let you stay here.”
Feb. 6, 2006 Tr., Dkt. 27-1, at 4:19-25. The IJ then
explained three fundamental rights to the group - the right
to an attorney, the right to submit evidence, and the right
concluding the group session, the IJ conducted a series of
individual hearings. When it was Gonzalez-Sanchez's turn,
the IJ asked if he understood the purpose of the hearing and
if he wanted to proceed that day. Gonzalez-Sanchez answered
affirmatively and then admitted that he was a citizen and
native of Mexico. Responding to further questioning,
Gonzalez-Sanchez told the IJ he was married; his wife had a
green card; he and his wife had two young children (both born
in the United States); his father lived in the United States
as a permanent resident; and his mother lived in Mexico.
ascertaining this information, the IJ engaged in this
exchange with the government's lawyer and
COURT: What's the government have regarding cancellation
for non- permanent residence, adjustment of status.
It depends on if the marriage is valid if he can
immigrate through the father (inaudible) voluntary
return. Any evidence you have?
KATAVIO: Other than it looks like he's been arrested
three times by border patrol and he has a conviction up in
Idaho for careless driving.
COURT: Mr. Sanchez, have you been arrested by immigration
authorities three times?
COURT: And each time, were you returned to ...