USA v. Hernandez-Adame

5th CircuitOct 24, 2025

Split Score

SplitScore: 33/100

Case Summary

Disposition

Affirmed in Part

The Fifth Circuit affirmed Lazaro Hernandez-Adame’s conviction for illegal re-entry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), rejecting his claim that the district court erred by refusing to instruct the jury on the definition of ‘official restraint.’ The panel held that the pattern jury instruction correctly stated the law and that the lack of a specific ‘official restraint’ charge did not impair the defense, though the case was remanded solely to correct a clerical error in the written judgment.

Circuit Split Identified

Legal Issue

Whether a district court must give a jury instruction on the 'official restraint' doctrine in an 8 U.S.C. § 1326 illegal-re-entry prosecution and how that doctrine is defined.

Circuit Positions

9th Circuit

Official-restraint doctrine requires a specific jury instruction; constant government surveillance constitutes official restraint and its omission mandates reversal.

5th Circuit(this circuit)

Pattern § 1326 instruction, without a separate official-restraint definition, is ordinarily adequate; denial of the requested instruction is not reversible error.

Conflict Summary

The Ninth Circuit treats the doctrine of ‘official restraint’ as requiring an instruction that actual entry demands both physical presence and freedom from continuous government surveillance; refusal of the instruction warrants reversal. The Fifth Circuit acknowledges that freedom from official restraint is conceptually relevant but holds that the pattern § 1326 instruction, without a specific ‘official restraint’ definition, is generally sufficient and denial of such an instruction is not reversible error.

Parties & Counsel

Parties

Appellant:Lazaro Hernandez-Adame
Appellee:United States of America

Opinion Document