MEMORANDUM **

David Erasmo Escamilla-Gallegos appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction for reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Escamilla-Gallegos contends that his guilty plea was involuntary because, at the time of his pretrial conference and change-of-plea hearing, his confusion was apparent and was aggravated by his recent use of pain medication. We review de novo whether a defendant’s plea was voluntary. See United States v. Kaczynski, 289 F.3d 1108, 1114 (9th Cir. 2001). Contrary to Escamilla-Gallegos’s contention, his statements at the hearing reflect that he pleaded guilty voluntarily. See id. at 1115 (substantial weight is given to defendant’s in-court statements).

AFFIRMED.