Holding that Herrera-Pagoada couldn’t collaterally attack (and thereby invalidate) his sentence for illegal reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b). Despite Herrera-Pagoada’s claim that his trial counsel was ineffective, the Court held that he failed to show that “the entry of the removal order was fundamentally unfair” because a non-citizen has no due process right to be advised of discretionary relief like voluntary departure during removal proceedings.

Date of Decision