United States of America v. Ricardo Veloz-Alonzo

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION
File Name: 19a0158n.06
No. 18-3940
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
RICARDO VELOZ-ALONZO,
Defendant-Appellant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ON APPEAL FROM THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
OHIO
BEFORE: BOGGS, GIBBONS, and BUSH, Circuit Judges.
BOGGS, Circuit Judge. Ricardo Veloz-Alonzo pled guilty to reentering the United States
without permission after being deported. See 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). After he entered his plea, the
Supreme Court decided Pereira v. Sessions, 138 S. Ct. 2105 (2018). In due course, the district
court entered a judgment of conviction. Veloz-Alonzo argues that in light of Pereira, he is innocent
of illegal reentry as a matter of law, so his conviction must be reversed. In his view, because the
Notice to Appear that initiated his 2002 removal proceeding omitted a hearing date and time,
jurisdiction never vested in the immigration court, and his removal order is invalid.
After briefing in this case concluded, we rejected Veloz-Alonzo’s argument in Santos-
Santos v. Barr, 917 F.3d 486 (6th Cir. 2019). Santos-Santos holds that “[n]o references [in the
Notice to Appear] to the time and place of the hearing are required to vest jurisdiction” in the
immigration court. Id. at 490.
Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment of conviction.

-- 1 of 1 --