Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Dhyana Aderne Goltz, A045 296 896 (BIA Nov. 5, 2012)

Dhyana Aderne Goltz, A045 296 896 (BIA Nov. 5, 2012)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 38|Likes:
In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denied the Department of Homeland Security's motion for reconsideration and sustained its prior decision terminating proceedings because the record of the conviction did not demonstrate that the respondent was convicted of a domestic violence crime in violation of sections 200.481 and 200.485 of the Nevada Revised Statutes. The decision was written by Member Roger Pauley. The prior decision was Dhyana Aderne Goltz, A045 296 896 (BIA Jun. 12, 2012), available at http://www.scribd.com/doc/142755205/Dhyana-Aderne-Goltz-A045-296-896-BIA-Jun-12-2012.
In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denied the Department of Homeland Security's motion for reconsideration and sustained its prior decision terminating proceedings because the record of the conviction did not demonstrate that the respondent was convicted of a domestic violence crime in violation of sections 200.481 and 200.485 of the Nevada Revised Statutes. The decision was written by Member Roger Pauley. The prior decision was Dhyana Aderne Goltz, A045 296 896 (BIA Jun. 12, 2012), available at http://www.scribd.com/doc/142755205/Dhyana-Aderne-Goltz-A045-296-896-BIA-Jun-12-2012.

More info:

Published by: Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC on May 21, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

02/12/2014

pdf

text

original

 
Esparza, Sylvia L.sq.LawOice of Syva
L
Esparza
33
E. Pepper Lane, Sute
5
Las Vegas NV
89
Name: GOLTZ DHYAA ADERNE
.S
  
Executive Ofce r mgrao Review
Board ofImmigaon AppealsOce ofhe Cek
507 Leesb Pke, St 00Fal Chruc Viin 04
S/CE Oce o Che Conse-LV
3373
Pepper LaneLas Vegas V
89
A
5-96896
Dae o ts noie
/
Encosed is a copy o he Boad's decsio d orde  he aboe-eereced casecosre
P Mmb:y, Rg
Sceely,
D
t
c
Doa CaChe Cerk
m: k
Cite as: Dhyana Aderne Goltz, A045 296 896 (BIA Nov. 5, 2012)
 
.
US Dpnt of Juic
Executiv Oc
r
Imgaion RevewDcso of
e
Board of mgion Appals
Fals
Churc,
Vrgina
22041
File:A045296 896 La Vega N
eDHY ANA
A
EE GOLTZIN MOAL PROEEDINGSMOTIONDaeON EHALF OF SPONDENTSylvia L Epaza EqeON EHALF OFDHSha PeAa hie oelAPPLIATION Reodeao
NO 0
5
1
The Depae o Hoed Sey (he DHS") h led a ely ooo eode o Je 2 20 deo ag a Iao dge deo o eaehee eovapoeedg o he od ha he DHS led o pee adeqae evdee o poveby e adovgevdee ha he epode had bee oved o volag aae law ha wodede he eovable a hged The oio wll be deiedA ie  he appea o hi ae wa he Iao dge deo ha he ovioeoda bed by he DHS wa eo how ha he epode wa oved abaey/doei vioee e
in volaon of secons 200 481and200. 85 othe Nea Reed Stautes,
a aleged  he Noe o Appe
 appeal he DHS had agedie alaha heeode ad al opla ae ogehe we e o how ha he epode hadbeeo oved 
)
he al opa led he eleva eo o Nevada law(eeo 00481 d 20048 o he Nevada Reved Sae) ad he e ode eeeedhe a opla a elag o bae doe volee" d oed heepodeglypea
See
DHS Appea ea 89 ig
Rea  Holde
59F3d8 9h  200
US

nenbrg
548 F3d 699 9h i 2008
nted Sae  Sckand
60F3d 963
(9
00)
1
 Nehe he DHS be o appea o he oo o eode lde pagebeWe oeha eeo o he appeal bee ed i he DHS oo o ode by eeee opeipage o he age eo
See eg
DHS Moo a 4efeegAge eo o be a pp 23 Fo lay whe g page ohe DHS bie o oo we wlle o page be ag o he  page(e he apo page o hedoe
2
e oeha 

 Snellenbege spa
wa eveed i pa b
Yong Holde_ 
3d
_
20
W
4074668 Sep  0) eveg
Snellenbege
o ee  held ha gly plea oojivey woded hge aded al allegao hee ad ha ae ahow egby  ele by pogo olive ed o ovo
Cite as: Dhyana Aderne Goltz, A045 296 896 (BIA Nov. 5, 2012)
 
A045 296 896
is moon, he DHS gues that he Board's decision did no "expainhow heevidencepresened by heDHS inhe insta case is disinguishabeom the evidence considered in
a Ho
and
  Snnbg" S
DHS Moion a 3-. he moion aso rgues ht theBoad did no consider the appicabiliy of hehird case cited by he DHS:
S Stan"
.a 4 FinayheDHS moion alsochaenges he Boadsnding ha even if a convicion pursuo secions200.81 and 200.85 ofNevada saue had been shown the DHS ied o pove ha heespondents convicion conains he eemens of a cime of domesic vioencei.e. ha theconvicion was maked by he use of vioen ce indicaive of a crime of vioenceWihegad o ou naysis of the suciency of e conicion recod o eect a conviction of he respondent ude secions 20048 and 200485 of Neva statewe disaee ha we iled oprovide te DHS wih adequate basis r our denia of the appeal irs we noedtha or decisionto dismiss the appeawas based on he easons staed in theImmiation Judges oder.
S
Boads  Jue 2 202 Oder a
.
As he miaion Judges order staed(a nding hat weexpand on beow) he minute oder a issue in . his cae maes no referenceto thesauociaion ming he basis of he espondensguity pea. IJ a 4 Inseadi indicaeshat heesponden was charged wi baey consiing domesic vioence a mee labe  he oensehat is insucien sanding aone o eect tha he convicion is  a removable oense
I
a 5e ephasized e Iiaon udges ndng above by nong in ou oder ha n

espondens case he mnue orde conains no efeence o . y specic sectionof the Nevadastae houghou is provisions erencing he responden inial no guiltypea d hen hisna plea ofguiy. Boards June 2 202 Ordera -2. e her indicaedhat e abenceof he satuo eence was
"[
u ]lie he evdence descbed in
 t a Ho spa
ad
 Snlnbg spa
each of whch involved convicions evidenced by minue ode.Specicay  caiy we note here hat in both
ta 
nd
Snlnbg
heminute odescontained refeence o he reevan secion of he sae saue under which he defeda wasconviced.
S tta 

Ho spa
a 85;
  Snnbg spa
and
 Snlnbg
93 3d 0509 (9h Ci 2007) (reversed by peceding decision) (referencinghedefendans gity pea to59 peal codeAso he DHSs citaion o
  Skan spa
we noe ha we nd his decisioninapposite n hat casete United Ses Cot of Appeas  heNih Circui approved heexaminaion of he conents o a docet shee o deemnee naue of a conicion r posesof a senencing enhcemen. 603d a 9687. Howeve we noeha in ha casete specicsae se under which he conviction arose ws no in quesion The deendants convicion oseuder aice 27 chape 3 C of the aryand Code which hen proscribed chid abuse.
Id
a 966.he quesionin
S

Skan spa
elaed o whethe he docke enies could be examinedto deemine he natre of the chid abuse convicion sincea ha ime boh sexua abue andphysica abuse were coveed by he same section of Maand aw.
I
a 96768.
exaingevidence reecing ha he defendan wa requied o register pusuant o sex oende saes heco consruedhe naue of he conviction under a modied caegoclapproach and ws noconceed whdeeining if cea nd onvincing evidenceof he specic coniction waspesened2
Cite as: Dhyana Aderne Goltz, A045 296 896 (BIA Nov. 5, 2012)

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->