Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
5Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Raul Sainz-Rivera, A091 684 104 (BIA Mar. 10, 2014)

Raul Sainz-Rivera, A091 684 104 (BIA Mar. 10, 2014)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 1,490|Likes:
In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissed the charge of deportability and held that Ariz. Rev. Stat. 28-1383(A)(1)—which criminalizes driving under the influence after one’s license has been suspended, canceled, revoked, refused or restricted—is not a categorical crime involving moral turpitude. The Board determined that the statute is not divisible in light of Descamps v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2276 (2013), because "driving" and being in "actual physical control" of a vehicle are alternative means of committing the offense, not alternative elements as to which jurors must unanimously agree. The decision was written by Member Roger Pauley and joined by Member John Guendelsberger and Member Anne Greer.

Looking for IRAC’s Index of Unpublished BIA Decisions? Visit www.irac.net/unpublished/index
In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissed the charge of deportability and held that Ariz. Rev. Stat. 28-1383(A)(1)—which criminalizes driving under the influence after one’s license has been suspended, canceled, revoked, refused or restricted—is not a categorical crime involving moral turpitude. The Board determined that the statute is not divisible in light of Descamps v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2276 (2013), because "driving" and being in "actual physical control" of a vehicle are alternative means of committing the offense, not alternative elements as to which jurors must unanimously agree. The decision was written by Member Roger Pauley and joined by Member John Guendelsberger and Member Anne Greer.

Looking for IRAC’s Index of Unpublished BIA Decisions? Visit www.irac.net/unpublished/index

More info:

Published by: Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC on Mar 18, 2014
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

10/16/2014

pdf

text

original

 
SAIZ-RIVERA, RAUL 145971/A091684-104 PIA COUTY JAIL P

BOX 2610 FORECE,
85132 Nam: SAIZRIVERA, RAU
 eptment  Jtie
Executive Oce r Immgraon Revew
Board of Immigratn Appeals Oce of he Clerk
510 lburg Pike Suit 2000 Fas Chc Vginia 2030
HS/IC Oice of Chif Counsl LO P.O. Box 2558 Poenix,
85002 A 091-68404 Date of this otic 3/10/2014
closed s a copy of the Boad's decso and ode  e above-reenced case. Ecose
P Mb: Gg h G   y Rg
Sncerey,
D
c
Donna Ca Ce Cek
lucasd  k
For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished
Cite as: Raul Sainz-Rivera, A091 684 104 (BIA Mar. 10, 2014)
 

Dpamn

Jusi
Executive Oce
r
Immaion Revew Fals Cc, Vga
5
File: 09 8 0 Florence,
Deciso of he Board oao Appeals
Date
MAR   4
In re L SNZRVE aka Jsus rbieta aka Manue Saiz
MOV POCEEINGS PPE ON BEHF O SPONDENT Pro se CGE: Notice Sec 22(a)()()(i), &N ct [8 USC
§
1l82(a)()()(i) Prsent wtout bein admted or parole (itdran) Loded: Sec. 237(a)(2)()(ii) I&N ct 8 US.
§
227(a)(2)()(i)] Convcte of two or more crmes nvovn moral uriude PPLICTION Terminaion e respondent appeals om  iration Jude's October  2013, decison ndin him removabe om th nited States as an alien conviced of two crms nvolvin moral tuiude no arsin om a sine scheme of crminal msconduct Section 237(a)(2)()() of he Immiration  Nationait ct 8 .SC
§
1227(a)(2)()(ii). Te appea wil be sustand an  the record will be remande The respondent a native and citien of Mexco as tce ben convicd of violatin riz. ev Sat.  28383()(), whch probis  person om drvin" or xercsin actual physica cono" over a motor vehicle while under the inuence of intoxicatin liquor or s i he person knos hat his dver icense or prvilee to drve s suspende, canceed, revoked, resed or rsicted Te issue on appeal is heher he Department of omel Securiy (DS") has proven by cear an convincin evience at these oenss qlify as crimes invovin moral turpue (CIMT") r removal purposes. Upon e novo revew

8 .F.R. § 003 1 ( d)(3 )(i), we conclue a he DHS as no cie ta brden The Unied States Court o ppeals r t Nnh Circu n whose ursdicon ths mater ases has concluded that r Rev Stat
§
28383()() encompasses some conduct hat s o uiuinous n oer n  is n
C lj-C

Hd
8 3d 903, 917 (9t ir. 2009) (en ban) (errn o
  f Lzz
22 I&N Dec. 188 (B 999), in which is Board un a moral urpitude ineres in te act of drvin"  r the nuence of alcohol or drus wth knowle that one's drvin prvilees hav been revoked),
wi HerdeMre
v.
Ashcrof,
329 F3d 17, 8119 (9th Cir 2003) (holdin hat moral tue dos

iere in the ac of exercisn acua phsca conro" over a veicle he intoxicated, even f the accused knew is dvn privilees ad been suspende)
Cite as: Raul Sainz-Rivera, A091 684 104 (BIA Mar. 10, 2014)
 
A0914104 As Ariz Rv Stat § 2-133A ncompasss both turpitudnous ad nonurudnous condut, the Nnth Crut has treated i as a divsbl" statu visvs he CMT oncpt autorizng mmaton Judgs to consul alns convcion rcords undr h moded agoral approach" o dtrmn hther te paricuar alen br he ou was onvced o dring" aher than mely exersig actual physial onrol"
See Marmlej-Camps v Hlder sura
a 913 &  12. e Imigation Judg onducd s a modid ategorica nquy here and ud tat the rspondens guy peas er o dving" whle intoxatd J at 2-4
.
Durng th pendeny of ths removal proeedings hoevr, e Suprm Cou decided
Descas v United tates
133 S Ct 226 203, ic mraced a oncepon of dvsibilty" at aps substantialy narowe han at mbodid n
 Marmlejamps
T
escaps
Cou hd tha a crnal satue is disil, so as o warrat a modied agoral inquiy, ony f: 1 it ss mulp dsree onses s numrated ateatives or dens a sn oens by referen to disjuncve sts of lemnts," mor han on combination of hch could supo a convto; and 2 at least on but no all of hose lisd oenss or ombinations of disjunte lements is a agora math to  rlean gnric standd
Id
at 2281, 223 n ot words, t moded categoica approach does not apply mey eas he elemnts o a e a sometimes b prod by rn o
cduc
 tha s he genrc federa stdad undr
escaps
sch crmes ar mrely overbroad," thy are no disibe"
Id.
a 2256 229092. Th Ninth Ciruit has drmined ha h cagorcal approach apples n rmova cases nvovng CMT onvictions,
ee OlvasMa v lder
7 3d 199 9h Cir 013, ad has also onluded that  approac to dvisility anond n
Descams
aplis n h mgration ontex
See guiarTurcis  Hlder
740 3d 1294, 30-02 9t Cr 201 Acordingly, o pse ask is to deid hethr Ariz R Stat § 28-1383A rmans dsibl" r CIM puposs ithi the meanng o
Descamps.
I ight of
Descas
Aiz Re Stat § 281383A an b onsderd divisbe" no disrt onss requng drng" d atua pysal control" only if Arzona law dens drng" and acual psal ontr" as atatv elments" o h oens Under
Descps,
 the m elment" mans a t aout a cr whih t] Sxt Amendmn contemplas that a juynot a snncig couwill nd .. , unaimously ad byond a reasonabl doubt"
Id
at 2288 citng
Richardsn v United Saes
526 S 13, 817 1999 us, f Arzona law does not rqur both rof byond a reasonabe doubt ad uy unanmi as to e a dendan ged under iz R tat § 2133A was driing" or exersing acual hysa ontro" oe th vhic t ncssily llos hat drvng" and actua psial ontol" a not ateati emens" r disibity puoses, ut raher mer ateav mans" b which a dendant can comt aavae DI
See Schad v rzna
501
.S. 2, 3
(991) (plualiy opinion ("[L]egislaures fequety enumerae aleaive
means o comng a crme ihou nendn o dn sara mns or sparae crms"  Aizona Supreme Cout as hd tha h Sates onsttional reirmnt of ur unant,
see
Arz Const., At II, § 23, does not entl a defendant to a unanimos verdct on he es m e in wh e [rnal at as omed"
ee ate v Encnas
67 P2d 62, 62  1982
caon omited). Appying ha
rnl
o Aizona's

saues, he
2
Cite as: Raul Sainz-Rivera, A091 684 104 (BIA Mar. 10, 2014)

Activity (5)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
Alfonso Muñoz added this note
This was a pro se case! My respects for Mr. Sains...
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
Alfonso Muñoz liked this

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)//-->