"Congress’s use of the phrase “enters into” in the explicit language of the statute—an act that can only occur on the singular date that a marriage takes place—upends the district court’s conclusion that marriage fraud is a continuing offense. Accordingly, because Rojas entered into a marriage with the purpose of evading the immigration laws on April 23, 2007, he completed the crime of marriage fraud on that date, more than five years before the government filed the indictment. Based on its erroneous interpretation of the statute of limitations and the date of the crime’s completion under § 1325(c), the district court abused its discretion when it denied Rojas’s motion to dismiss. We therefore reverse the district court and remand for proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion." - USA v. Rojas, June 20, 2013.