Does a plea of guilty to a violation of section 1325(a)(2) of the Immigration Code apply to a defendant who has eluded examination and inspection by immigration officers?

Rosales, 819 F.3d 1149, 1158 (9th Cir. 2016). A violation of 1325(a)(2) does not require proof of entry and does not require proof that Defendant was free from official restraint. Consequently, a plea of guilty to a violation of 1325(a)(2) does not require Defendant to admit facts to support the conclusion that he was free from official restraint. The offense described in 1325(a)(2) requires facts to support the conclusion that an alien has eluded examination and inspection by immigration officers. The offense in 1325(a)(1) and the offense in 1325(a)(2) may include conduct that can partially overlap but the offenses do not completely overlap such that one is superfluous. See United States v. Carona, 660 F.3d 360, 369 (9th Cir. 2011) ("It should not be surprising that statutes are not necessarily written so that one and only one can apply at a time. To the contrary, statutes often contain overlapping provisions.").