sought, fled the country. Similarly, the “reenter” provision of sub-part B extends disentitlement authority over another class of persons traditionally recognized as “fugitives,” that is, persons who allegedly committed crimes while in the United States but who were outside the country — for whatever reason — when they learned that their arrests were sought and who then refused to return to the United States in order to avoid prosecution. See, e.g., United States v. Eng, 951 F.2d at 464 (“Fleeing from justice is not always a physical act; it may be a state of mind.... Thus, a defendant with notice of criminal charges who actively resists returning from abroad to face those charges is a fugitive from justice .... ”); United States v. $45,940 in United States Currency, 739 F.2d at 796-98 (<HOLDING>); see also Jhirad v. Ferrandina, 536 F.2d 478,
holding that deported canadian who failed to seek permission from us consulate to enter united states and answer pending criminal charges was properly deemed a fugitive recognizing that the plain language of  1326a establishes that a previously deported alien who illegally enters and remains in the united states can violate the statute at three different points in time namely when the alien 1 enters 2 attempts to enter or 3 is at any time found in the united states holding that the final termination of the criminal proceedings occurred when criminal charges  were dismissed with prejudice rather than when the accused was released from prison pending a retrial recognizing the inherent anxiety associated with pending criminal charges holding that sjection 241a5  bars aliens who have illegally reentered the united states after having previously been deported from applying for relief