Case ID: f-appx_630/html/0651-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Jose GARCIA-CHAIDEZ, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 10-71313.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 20, 2014 .
    Jan. 20, 2016.
    ALexander Warren Tucker, Esquire Law Offices of Alexander Tucker San Diego, CA, for Petitioner.
    Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security San Francisco, CA, OIL, Michele Yvette Frances Sarko, Esquire, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: WARDLAW and PAEZ, Circuit Judges and KENNELLY, District Judge.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
    
      
       The Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly, District Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, sitting by designation.
    
   MEMORANDUM

Jose Garcia-Chaidez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’s (“BIA”) decision that his conviction under California Penal Code section 273a(a) was a “crime of violence” under 18 U.S.C. § 16, and therefore qualified as an aggravated felony. The BIA affirmed the IJ’s decision pretermittihg Garcia-Chaidez’s application for cancellation of removal, and ordering him removed.

In Ramirez v. Lynch, No. 08-72896, we held that California Penal Code section 273a(a) is categorically overbroad and indivisible, and therefore is not a “crime of violence” and cannot constitute an aggravated felony. Because Garciar-Chaidez appealed to the BIA only the determination that his conviction qualified as an aggravated felony, we do not reach the IJ’s decision that he was also removable for having committed a crime of child abuse under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(E).

We therefore grant the petition and remand to the BIA for further proceedings.

Petition GRANTED and REMANDED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and. is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.