Case Explained: Non-Argument Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. KYLE KERIAN MAHARAJ

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Filed: 2026-08-13 Docket: 0:24-cr-60196-DSL-1 The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of Kyle Kerian Maharaj’s motion to dismiss his criminal indictment for unlawful reentry of a removed alien under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). The court held that Maharaj failed to satisfy the requirements for a collateral attack on his underlying deportation order under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(d), specifically failing to demonstrate that his deportation proceedings deprived him of judicial review or were fundamentally unfair. The court applied the three-prong test established in *United States v. Zelaya* and codified at 8 U.S.C. § 1326(d)(1)–(3), which requires a defendant to show: (1) exhaustion of administrative remedies; (2) deprivation of judicial review due to improper proceedings; and (3) fundamental unfairness in the entry of the order. The court focused on the second and third prongs, rejecting Maharaj’s argument that his prior Florida robbery conviction did not qualify as an “aggravated felony” because he was sentenced to two years of “community control” rather than a term of imprisonment of at least one year. Relying on the statutory definition in 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(48)(B), which defines a “term of imprisonment” to include any period of “incarceration or confinement,” and citing its prior decision in *Herrera v. United States Attorney General*, the court ruled that Florida community control constitutes a form of confinement equivalent to house arrest. The court determined that Maharaj’s two-year sentence of intensive, supervised custody restricted his freedom within the community and home, thereby satisfying the “term of imprisonment” requirement for an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(F). Consequently, the deportation order was not fundamentally unfair, and the deprivation of judicial review prong was not met. The practical consequence is that Maharaj’s conviction for unlawful reentry stands, his motion to dismiss the indictment remains denied, and he must proceed with his criminal case without the ability to collaterally attack the validity of his prior deportation order based on the classification of his Florida conviction. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.