
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Luis ALTAMIRANO-VARGAS, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 03-30205.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 8, 2003.
    
    Decided Dec. 15, 2003.
    Frank Noonan, Esq., USPO-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Portland, OR, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    John E. Storkel, Esq., Storkel & Grefen-son, P.C., Attorneys at Law, Salem, OR, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before GOODWIN, WALLACE and TROTT, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Jose Luis Altamirano-Vargas appeals the judgment of conviction following a bench-trial, and his sentence for illegally reentering the United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Altamirano-Vargas contends that the district court should have determined that his significantly reduced mental capacity could be used as a defense to the general intent crime of illegally reentering the United States following deportation. Altamirano-Vargas’s claim is precluded by this court’s controlling precedent. See Pena-Cabanillas v. United States, 394 F.2d 785, 790 (9th Cir.1968) (deciding that illegal reentry is a general intent crime, which does not require the government to prove that defendant knew he was not entitled to enter the country without the permission of the Attorney General); see also United States v. Leon-Leon, 35 F.3d 1428, 1432-33 (9th Cir.1994) (finding irrelevant the defendant’s reasonable belief that he had permission to reenter the United States with respect to a conviction under § 1326).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
     