Where a Notice to Appear served on a noncitizen to initiate removal proceedings fails to state the date and time to appear, the noncitizen is never provided with the date and time for the removal hearing, and the noncitizen is ordered removed in absentia, may that removal serve as a basis for a subsequent criminal prosecution for illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326, or is such a prosecution barred either because the immigration court lacked jurisdiction to order the noncitizen removed or because the noncitizen was deprived of due process?

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW A charging document is required to initiate removal proceedings against a noncitizen. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.14; 8 U.S.C. § 1229. A Notice to Appear (NTA) qualifies as a charging document in this context. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.13. Section 1229 compels the Government to serve NTA’s containing the time and place of the hearing for jurisdiction to vest in an immigration Court under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.14. An illegal reentry conviction cannot be sustained when the underlying removal order is void, and the indictment charging illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 based on such a void removal order must be dismissed. This Court has held that in order for a Notice to Appear to be legally valid, it must, at a minimum state the place and time at which a noncitizen is to appear before an immigration judge. See Pereira v. Sessions, 138 S. Ct. 2105 (2018). This Petition raises the following issue: Where a Notice to Appear served on a noncitizen to initiate removal proceedings fails to state the date and time to appear, the noncitizen is never provided with the date and time for the removal hearing, and the noncitizen is ordered removed in absentia, may that removal serve as a basis for a subsequent criminal prosecution for illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326, or is such a prosecution barred either because the immigration court lacked jurisdiction to order the noncitizen removed or because the noncitizen was deprived of due process? 1 INTERESTED PARTIES There are no