Case ID: f-appx_23/html/0823-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Javier BARAJAS-BARAJAS, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 99-71023.
    INS No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted Dec. 17, 2001.
    
    Decided Dec. 27, 2001.
    Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, TROTT and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The Attorney General of the United States is the proper respondent in a petition for review of an order of removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(3)(A).
    
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Javier Barajas-Barajas, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order finding him removable as an aggravated felon under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii). We have jurisdiction to determine whether petitioner is removable because he was convicted of an aggravated felony. Matsuk v. INS, 247 F.3d 999, 1000-02 (9th Cir.2001). We review de novo legal questions under the Immigration and Nationality Act. Hartooni v. INS, 21 F.3d 336, 340 (9th Cir.1994). We grant the petition.

On June 22,1990, petitioner was convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol and causing injury to another person, in violation of California Vehicle Code § 23153(a). In United States v. Trinidad-Aquino, 259 F.3d 1140 (9th Cir.2001), this court held that a violation of § 23153(a) is not a “crime of violence” as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 16. Therefore, we find that petitioner’s conviction does not qualify as an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(F).

PETITION GRANTED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be citéd to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.