770 F.3d 823 (9th Cir. 2014), 11-72401, De Martinez v. Holder

Docket Nº:11-72401
Citation:770 F.3d 823
Opinion Judge:PER CURIAM
Party Name:GRACIELA HERNANDEZ DE MARTINEZ, AKA Graciela Hernandez Martinez, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent
Attorney:Hugo F. Larios, Tempe, Arizona, for Petitioner. Karen L. Melnik, United States Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, D.C. for Respondent.
Judge Panel:Before: Dorothy W. Nelson, Barry G. Silverman, and Milan D. Smith, Jr., Circuit Judges.
Case Date:October 24, 2014
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
SUMMARY

Petitioner, a native and citizen of Mexico, sought review of a final order of removal. The BIA held that petitioner is statutorily ineligible for cancellation of removal because her conviction for criminal impersonation in violation of Arizona Revised Statutes 13-2006(A)(1) is categorically a crime involving moral turpitude. The court affirmed, concluding that the statute explicitly requires... (see full summary)

 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 823

770 F.3d 823 (9th Cir. 2014)

GRACIELA HERNANDEZ DE MARTINEZ, AKA Graciela Hernandez Martinez, Petitioner,

v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent

No. 11-72401

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

October 24, 2014

Submitted October 6, 2014 [*]

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Agency No. A201-157-132.

SUMMARY[**]

Immigration

The panel denied Graciela Hernandez de Martinez's petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision finding her statutorily ineligible for cancellation of removal because her criminal impersonation conviction constitutes a categorical crime involving moral turpitude.

The panel held that petitioner's conviction for criminal impersonation by assuming a false identity with intent to defraud, in violation of Arizona Revised Statutes § 13-2006(A)(1), is categorically a crime involving moral turpitude, because the statute explicitly requires proof of fraudulent intent.

Hugo F. Larios, Tempe, Arizona, for Petitioner.

Karen L. Melnik, United States Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, D.C. for Respondent.

Before: Dorothy W. Nelson, Barry G. Silverman, and Milan D. Smith, Jr., Circuit Judges.

OPINION

Page 824

Per Curiam Opinion

PER CURIAM

Graciela Hernandez de Martinez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of a final order of removal. The Board of Immigration Appeals held that petitioner is statutorily ineligible for cancellation of removal because her conviction for criminal impersonation in violation of Arizona Revised Statutes § 13-2006(A)(1) is categorically a crime involving moral turpitude. We agree because the statute explicitly requires proof of fraudulent intent.

Petitioner, a native and citizen of Mexico, entered the United States in 1999 without being admitted or paroled. On March 18, 2011, petitioner pled guilty to and was convicted of criminal impersonation in violation of A.R.S. § 13-2006(A)(1). The statute reads as follows: " A person commits criminal impersonation by . . . [a]ssuming a false identity with the intent to defraud another." Criminal impersonation is a Class 6 felony. Petitioner was sentenced to one year of probation.

The subsequent notice to appear in immigration proceedings alleged that...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP