United States v. Sandoval-Gonzalez
642 F.3d 717, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 8448, 2011 WL 1533516 (2011)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
In a criminal prosecution for illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326, alienage is an essential element of the offense which the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt. A defendant raising a claim of derivative citizenship to negate the element of alienage does not bear any burden of proof or production, and shifting this burden to the defendant constitutes reversible error.
Facts:
- Gerardo Sandoval-Gonzalez was born in 1957 in Tijuana, Mexico.
- His birth certificate listed his mother as a Mexican national and his father as a national of the United States.
- At the age of fourteen, Sandoval-Gonzalez entered the United States without inspection.
- In February 2006, after being charged with being unlawfully present, Sandoval-Gonzalez did not contest his removability and was deported.
- After reentering the country, he was deported again in December 2006.
- In 2008, Sandoval-Gonzalez was discovered again in the United States.
- He initially told immigration officers he was a U.S. citizen born in California but later admitted he had been previously deported and lacked immigration documents.
Procedural Posture:
- The U.S. government charged Gerardo Sandoval-Gonzalez in U.S. District Court (trial court) with illegal reentry after deportation under 8 U.S.C. § 1326.
- At trial, the court permitted the prosecution to argue that Sandoval-Gonzalez had the burden to prove his claim of derivative citizenship and that a 'presumption' of alienage existed.
- The trial court overruled the defense's objections to the prosecution's burden-shifting statements during closing arguments.
- The jury returned a guilty verdict.
- The district court denied Sandoval-Gonzalez's motion for a judgment of acquittal.
- Sandoval-Gonzalez (as appellant) appealed his conviction to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
In a prosecution for illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326, does a defendant bear the burden of production or proof to establish a claim of derivative citizenship used to negate the element of alienage?
Opinions:
Majority - Reinhardt, Circuit Judge
No. A criminal defendant faces no burden of proof or production regarding the issue of derivative citizenship in a prosecution for an offense of which alienage is an element. Alienage is a core element of the illegal reentry offense under 8 U.S.C. § 1326, which the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt. A claim of derivative citizenship is not an affirmative defense that justifies or excuses the crime; rather, it is a defense that directly negates the element of alienage. Just as a defendant claiming an alibi does not bear the burden of proving their absence, a defendant claiming citizenship does not bear the burden of proving it. The trial court committed reversible error by permitting the prosecutor to argue that there was a 'presumption' of alienage and that Sandoval-Gonzalez had the burden to 'establish' the elements of his derivative citizenship claim, thereby impermissibly shifting the government's burden of proof to the defendant. This error was prejudicial, particularly given the jury's lengthy deliberations on alienage, the only contested issue at trial.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the fundamental principle that the prosecution bears the burden of proving every element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. It clarifies the critical distinction between true affirmative defenses, where a defendant might bear a burden of production, and defenses that directly negate an element of the charged offense. By categorizing derivative citizenship claims as the latter, the court ensures that the government cannot sidestep its constitutional obligations in illegal reentry cases by forcing defendants to prove their own citizenship status, thereby strengthening the presumption of innocence.
Unlock the full brief for United States v. Sandoval-Gonzalez