Matter of ZARAGOZA-VAQUERO, 26 I&N Dec. 814 (BIA 2016)
The offense of criminal copyright infringement in violation of 17 U.S.C. § 506(a)(1)(A) (2012) and 18 U.S.C. § 2319(b)(1) (2012) is a crime involving moral turpitude.
Naturalization granted for person with crimes
Filed under: crimes | Tagged: cmt, crime, crime involving moral turpitude, crimes, Immigration, Immigration Attorney, Immigration Crimes, Immigration Lawyer | Leave a comment »
Matter of TIMA, 26 I&N Dec. 839 (BIA 2016)
A fraud waiver under section 237(a)(1)(H) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(H) (2012), cannot waive an alien’s removability under section 237(a)(2)(A)(i) for having been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, even if the conviction is based on the underlying fraud.
Filed under: fraud waiver | Tagged: cmt, crime of moral turpitude, fraud waiver, Immigration, Immigration Attorney, Immigration Lawyer | Leave a comment »
Matter of DIAZ-LIZARRAGA, 26 I&N Dec. 847 (BIA 2016)
(1) A theft offense is a crime involving moral turpitude if it involves a taking or exercise of control over another’s property without consent and with an intent to deprive the owner of his property either permanently or under circumstances where the owner’s property rights are substantially eroded.
(2) Shoplifting in violation of section 13-1805(A) of the Arizona Revised Statutes is categorically a crime involving moral turpitude.
https://californiaimmigration.us/petty-theft-exception-for-illegal-immigrant/
Filed under: Immigration Attorney | Tagged: cmt, Crimes of Moral Turpitude, petty offense exception | Leave a comment »
Filed under: crimes | Tagged: cmt, crime involving moral turpitude, Immigration, Immigration Attorney, Immigration Lawyer, larceny, petit larceny | Leave a comment »
The Ninth Circuit granted the petition for review of the BIA’s precedent decision in Matter of Almanza-Arenas, which held that a conviction for vehicle theft under California Vehicle Code §10851(a) constitutes a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT). The court remanded to the BIA, holding that, because the least of the acts criminalized under §10851(a) is a temporary taking, the statute is overbroad and thus not categorically a CIMT. The court also found that §10851(a) is an indivisible statute under Descamps v. United States.
https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/vehicle-theft/
https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/cmt/
https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/crime-of-moral-turpitude/
https://californiaimmigration.us/can-i-be-deported-for-this-crime/
Filed under: Immigration Attorney | Tagged: cmt, crime of moral turpitude, descamps, indivisible statute, ninth circuit, vehicle theft | Leave a comment »
https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/assault/
https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/conviction-for-assault-with-a-deadly-weapon/
https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/crime-moral-turpitude/
Filed under: Immigration Attorney | Tagged: assault, cmt, crime moral turpitude | Leave a comment »
Question: I committed a relatively small crime. Am I now not admissible to the U.S.?
Answer: It will depend on what exactly you committed. However, there is what is known as the petty offense exception.
Question: What is the petty offense exemption?
Answer: An alien (whether or not a minor) is not inadmissible if the CIMT is for a petty offense. A conviction (or admission) is considered a petty offense: “if the maximum penalty possible for the crime of which the alien was convicted … did not exceed imprisonment for one year and, if the alien was convicted of such crime, the alien was not sentenced to a term of imprisonment in excess of 6 months (regardless of the extent to which the sentence was ultimately executed).
Question: What if there is an undeterminate probationary period?
Answer: An undesignated probationary sentence, unlike an indeterminate sentence, is not considered a felony punishable by more than one year imprisonment, where the court has designated it a misdemeanor punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of 6 months.
Question: What if the crime is a ‘wobbler’?
Answer: Cal. Penal Code §487.2 is a “wobbler” statute and where judge designates it as a misdemeanor, the BIA is bound by that determination for purposes of the petty offense exception. You need to look at each particular State.
Question: What if I had a drug conviction?
Answer: Department of State takes the position that the petty offense exception is not applicable to drug cases.
Question: What if I committed or admitted to more than 1 petty offense?
Answer: The petty offense exception is not applicable if more than one CIMT offense has been committed or admitted.
Question: What if I committed more than 1 crime, but only 1 is a CIMT?
Answer: Where there was a second CIMT, the “stop-time” rule applied because the petty offense exception only applies to the first CIMT. However, it remains effective where one of the 2 offenses was not for a CIMT. For example, an applicant who was convicted of a petty offense that was a CIMT and a second offense (battery) that was not a CIMT, he is not barred from cancellation, because he has not been convicted of an offense under §212(a)(2). It also remains effective for purposes of cancellation, where the second CIMT was not committed until after the residency requirement had accrued. The “stop-time” rule did not bar cancellation where first conviction was a petty offense and second conviction occurred after respondent accrued 7 years of continuous residence.
Question: What if I admit the facts of a particular crime?
Answer: If there was no conviction but the person admits facts, the petty offense exception applies and the alien is not inadmissible so long as the maximum sentence that could have been imposed does not exceed one year.
https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/petty-offense-exception/
https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/cimt/
https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/cmt/
===========
Filed under: Immigration Attorney, petty offense exception | Tagged: Brian D. Lerner, cimt, cmt, Immigration Attorney, Immigration Lawyer, petty offense exception | Leave a comment »
The Second Circuit held that the BIA should determine on remand whether it still adheres to the position that concealment of a felony qualifies as a “crime involving moral turpitude.” If so, the BIA should determine whether its position can be applied retroactively to the petitioner’s case.
https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/aggrvated-felony/
https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/aggravated-felony/
https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/felony/
Filed under: Felony | Tagged: BIA, board of immigration appeals, cmt, crime of moral turpitude, Felony, Immigration, Immigration Attorney, Immigration Lawyer, misprison | Leave a comment »
The Ninth Circuit held that the petitioner’s conviction under Arizona Revised Statutes §13-2002 is a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT) because the statute criminalizes conduct that constitutes fraud. The panel held that the exception in Beltran-Tirado to the clearly established rule that a fraud conviction is a CIMT did not apply to this offense, where the underlying conduct involved the use of false information to obtain employment.
Filed under: Immigration Attorney | Tagged: cimt, cmt, crime involving moral turpitude, Fraud | Leave a comment »
Immigration Lawyer
Brian D. Lerner Immigration Attorney & Deportation Lawyer Blog 