Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

United States of America v. Gasper Cedillo-Cobo

Date: 12-06-2022

Case Number: 22-cr-79

Judge: C.J. Williams

Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa (Linn County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: United States Attorney’s Office

Defendant's Attorney:







Click Here to Watch How To Find A Lawyer by Kent Morlan



Click Here For The Best Cedar Rapids Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory



If no lawyer is listed, call 918-582-6422 and MoreLaw will help you find a lawyer for free.







Description:
Cedar Rapids, Iowa criminal law lawyer represented Defendant charged with reentry into the United States after being deports.







MoreLaw Legal News For Cedar Rapids











Gaspar Cedillo-Cobo, age 23, a citizen of Guatemala illegally present in the United States and residing in Galena, Illinois, received the prison term after an October 11, 2022 guilty plea to one count of illegal reentry into the United States after having been deported. 



At the guilty plea, Cedillo-Cobo admitted he had previously been deported from the United States and illegally reentered the United States without the permission of the United States government. Cedillo-Cobo was deported in March 2018 following his conviction in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas for illegal entry into the United States. On September 8, 2022, immigration officials learned Cedillo-Cobo had illegally returned to the United States and found Cedillo-Cobo at the Jones County, Iowa, jail following his arrest on state charges.



Cedillo-Cobo was sentenced in Cedar Rapids by United States District Court Judge C.J. Williams. Cedillo-Cobo was sentenced to 75 days' imprisonment. He must also serve a one-year term of supervised release after the prison term. There is no parole in the federal system.



Cedillo-Cobo is being held in the United States Marshal's custody until he can be turned over to immigration officials.



The case was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Daniel C. Tvedt and investigated by the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Enforcement and Removal Operations.



§ 1326. Reentry of removed aliens

(a) In general

Subject to subsection (b), any alien who—

(1) has been denied admission, excluded, de-

ported, or removed or has departed the United

States while an order of exclusion, deporta-

tion, or removal is outstanding, and thereafter

(2) enters, attempts to enter, or is at any

time found in, the United States, unless (A)

prior to his reembarkation at a place outside

the United States or his application for admis-

sion from foreign contiguous territory, the At-

torney General has expressly consented to

such alien's reapplying for admission; or (B)

with respect to an alien previously denied ad-

mission and removed, unless such alien shall

establish that he was not required to obtain

such advance consent under this chapter or

any prior Act,

shall be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not

more than 2 years, or both.

(b) Criminal penalties for reentry of certain re-

moved aliens

Notwithstanding subsection (a), in the case of

any alien described in such subsection—

(1) whose removal was subsequent to a con-

viction for commission of three or more mis-

demeanors involving drugs, crimes against the

person, or both, or a felony (other than an ag-

gravated felony), such alien shall be fined

under title 18, imprisoned not more than 10

years, or both;

(2) whose removal was subsequent to a con-

viction for commission of an aggravated fel-

ony, such alien shall be fined under such title,

imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both;

(3) who has been excluded from the United

States pursuant to section 1225(c) of this title

because the alien was excludable under section

1182(a)(3)(B) of this title or who has been re-

moved from the United States pursuant to the

provisions of subchapter V, and who there-

after, without the permission of the Attorney

General, enters the United States, or attempts

to do so, shall be fined under title 18 and im-

prisoned for a period of 10 years, which sen-

tence shall not run concurrently with any

other sentence.1 or

(4) who was removed from the United States

pursuant to section 1231(a)(4)(B) of this title

who thereafter, without the permission of the

Attorney General, enters, attempts to enter,

or is at any time found in, the United States

(unless the Attorney General has expressly

consented to such alien's reentry) shall be

fined under title 18, imprisoned for not more

than 10 years, or both.

For the purposes of this subsection, the term

''removal'' includes any agreement in which an

alien stipulates to removal during (or not dur-

ing) a criminal trial under either Federal or

State law.

(c) Reentry of alien deported prior to completion

of term of imprisonment

Any alien deported pursuant to section

1252(h)(2) 2 of this title who enters, attempts to

enter, or is at any time found in, the United

States (unless the Attorney General has ex-

pressly consented to such alien's reentry) shall

be incarcerated for the remainder of the sen-

tence of imprisonment which was pending at the

time of deportation without any reduction for

parole or supervised release. Such alien shall be

subject to such other penalties relating to the

reentry of deported aliens as may be available

under this section or any other provision of law.

(d) Limitation on collateral attack on underlying

deportation order

In a criminal proceeding under this section, an

alien may not challenge the validity of the de-

portation order described in subsection (a)(1) or

subsection (b) unless the alien demonstrates

that—

(1) the alien exhausted any administrative

remedies that may have been available to seek

relief against the order;

(2) the deportation proceedings at which the

order was issued improperly deprived the alien

of the opportunity for judicial review; and

(3) the entry of the order was fundamentally

unfair.