IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-20008
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
MARIO OSIRIS PINEDA,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-00-CR-529-1
- - - - - - - - - -
August 23, 2001
Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Mario Osiris Pineda appeals his conviction after a bench
trial for illegal reentry of a previously deported alien in
violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(1). Pineda argues that
the indictment was defective under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments
because it did not allege general intent. Because Pineda did not
challenge his indictment on this basis in the district court, we
review whether it was constitutionally sufficient under a
“maximum liberality” standard. See United States v. Guzman-
Ocampo, 236 F.3d 233, 236 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 121
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 01-20008
-2-
S. Ct. 2600 (2001). Pineda’s indictment “fairly imported that
his reentry was a voluntary act” and satisfied the constitutional
requirements of a valid indictment. See id. at 236, 239 & n.13;
United States v. Berrios-Centeno, 250 F.3d 294, 299 n.6 (5th Cir.
2001).
Pineda also argues that the district court erred when it
denied his motion to suppress the prior deportation because it
violated due process. He acknowledges that this issue is
foreclosed by United States v. Benitez-Villafuerte, 186 F.3d 651
(5th Cir. 1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1097 (2000), and raises
it only to preserve it for Supreme Court review. Because
Benitez-Villafuerte, 186 F.3d at 656-59, held that administrative
deportation proceedings do not violate due process, Pineda’s
argument is without merit.
AFFIRMED.