T h e pan el u nani m o usl y c on cl u des t h i s c as e i s s u i t abl e f or de ci s i on *
w itho u t o ra l ar g u m e n t. See Fed

. R

. A p p
. P

. 34 (a)( 2 ).

F OR P UB LIC AT ION


### U N I TED STA TES C O U R T O F A PPEA LS F O R T H E N IN T H C IR C U IT

RAMON M AC I AS -C AR R EO N , Petitioner ,

v. E RI C H. H OL DER , J R ., Attorney Ge ne ra l, Respondent

. No. 10-70380 Ag ency No. A072-300-102

OPI NI ON

On Petition for Review of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of I mmi g ratio n App e a ls Submit ted May

8, 2013 * Pa sa de na , Ca lif

or nia Filed Ma y 30, 2013
Be fore : J ohn T. Noonan, K im McL ane War dlaw, and Mary H. Murguia , Ci rc uit

Judg e s. Op ini on by Judg e MurguiaM AC I AS -C AR R EO N V
. H OL DER

2

T hi s s ummary cons t i t ut es no part o f the o pi ni on of

t he cour t

. I t ha s ** b een p repa red b y co urt s t af f f o r t he co nveni ence o f

t he read er. SUMMAR

Y **

Im m igration The pa nel denied Ramon Macias- C arreon’s pe tition for revie w of the B oard of

I mmigration Appeals’ de cision finding that hi s c on vic tio n f

or po sse ssi on

of mari jua na for sale , in vio la tio n o f C a li for ni a

He a lth& Sa fe ty

Cod e § 1 13 59 , is cate g orica lly

a cr ime relating to a c ontrolled substance

. Th e pan el fo un d th a t Ma c ia s- Carr e on fa ile d to me e t hi s burd e n of prov inga

“ re a lis tic pr ob a

bil ity” that Ca lif

or nia would apply

§ 11359 to conduct not re lated to a c on trolled substance, a

nd held that the conviction is thus a cate g orica l cri me r e lati n g to a

c o n tr o ll e d

s u b s ta n c e u n d e r

the I mmigration and Nationality Act.

CO UN SEL Elsa I nes Martinez, L aw Of fice s of Elsa Mar

tinez, P L C, L os Ang eles, California , for Petitioner. Matt Crapo, De partment of Justice, Civil Di v ision, Was hin g ton , D .C. , f

or Re sp on de nt.M AC I AS -C AR R EO N V
. H OL DER 3 OP IN ION
MURGUI A, Circuit J udg e: We have he l d t h at C alifornia H ealth & Safety Code § 11359 is categ orica lly a “controlled subs tance offe nse” f or sentenc ing pur

poses. United States v. Sandov al-Vene gas , 292 F.3d 1101, 1107 ( 9th C i r. 2002). W e now hold that § 11359 is categ orica lly

a cr ime “re lating to a

co n t ro l led su bs tanc e ” un de r t

he I mmi g ratio n a

nd Natio na lity

Ac t.
I. Bac kgr ound Petitioner Ramon Macias- Carre on, a native and citizen of Mexi co, ente red the United States in 1988 w ithout ins pection and without being admitted or p ar o led. On Jul y 1, 1992, Ma c ia s- Carr e on

ple d guil ty

in C alif or nia state c ourt

to violating Califor

nia Hea lth & Safe ty Code § 11359 and wa s s entenced to 120 day s imprisonment and three y ear s of probation. Section 11359 provides that “[e]very person who possesses for

sale a ny marijuana

. . . s hall be punished by imprisonment.”
On Fe bruar

y 20, 2007, the Depa

rtment of Homela

nd Security serve d Macia s-Carr eon with a Notice to Appea r (“NT A” ). Th e NT A a lle g e d Ma c ia s- Carr e on wa s r e mov a ble pursuant to (1) 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a) (6)( A)(i) as an a lien prese nt in the United States without being admitted or par oled and ( 2) 8 U.S.C. § 11 8 2(a) (2)( A)(i) (I I ) as a n alien convic ted of violating a law relating to a controlled substanc e. The latter char g e wa s based on Ma cias-Ca rre on’s 1992 conviction under Califor

nia Hea lth & Safe ty

Code § 11359 for po s s e s s i n g m ar i

j u an a f o r p u r p o s e s o f s a l e : m ar i

j u an a is a “contr olled substance” under f eder al law. 21 U.S.C. § 812,M AC I AS -C AR R EO N V
. H OL DER

4 S chedule I(c )( 10 ); see also id. § 8 0 2 ( 6 )

. A nim mi g r a ti on judge found Mac ias-Carr eon wa s removable on both char g es alleg ed in the NTA

. Macia s-Carr eon appe aled to the B oard of I mmigr ati on Ap pe a ls ( “ B I A” ), wh e re he p ropose d th a t Ca lif or nia He a lth & Sa f e ty Co d e § 1 1 3 5 9 p r o h ib it s th e p o s s e s s io n n o t only of marijuana for pur poses of sale, but the possession for purposes of sa le of other drug s that are not “controlled substances” under f

eder al law. T h

u s , M a c ia s-Carr eon ar g ued, § 11359 is a divisible statute and the g overnme nt could not meet its burden of

proving under t h e modified categ orica l approa ch that he h ad v iolated a law relating to a c ontrolled su bs tanc e . Mac ia s- Carr e on a lso a sk e d th e B I A t o r e mand his c a s e b e c a u s e , a b s e n t a c o n v ic ti o n f

o r a c r im e r e lati n g to a c on tr oll e d s ub sta

nc e , he wa s e lig ibl e to a dju st h is s ta tus

. See 8 U .S. C. § 12 29 b( b) (1 ). Th e B I A d e te rm ine d tha t § 113 59 is cate g orica lly a crime relating to a controlled subst an ce and denied Ma cias-Ca

rre on’s motion to remand. Macia s-Carr eon petit i ons for re view, ag ain contending th at § 1 1359 is not categ orica lly a cr ime relating to a c on tr oll ed subst anc e . We have jur isd ic tio n p ur su ant t o 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
II. Discussion We review de novo the BIA’s interpre tation of an a lien’s statute of convic tion. Nunez v. Holder , 594 F.3d 1124, 1129 (9th Cir. 2010). When conductinga cate g orica l analy sis, we compar e the a lien’s statute o f co nviction with the fede ral g round for

remova l to determine whe ther c onduct proscr ibed by the s tatute c a te g o r ic a ll y f a ll s w it h in th e r an g e o f

c o n d u ctM AC I AS -C AR R EO N V
. H OL DER 5

cover ed by

the fe dera l gr ound. Sanchez- Avalos v. Holder , 693 F.3d 1011, 1014 ( 9th Cir. 2012). California He alth & Saf

ety C o de § 11359 prohibits the possession of marijuana

fo r p urposes of sa le, and mar ijuana is a c on tr oll e d su

bs tanc e un de r fe de ra l law. M acia sCarre on’s asser

ti o n that someone c ould be convicte d of violating § 11359 without pos sessing marijuana for pur poses of sa le is fa c ia lly

imp la us ibl e and

un a c c omp anie d b y

a sin g le citation to a ca se in which this has occ urre d. Acc ording ly , he f a i l s t o m e e t h i s b u r d e n o f p r o v i n g a “ r e a l i s t i c p r o b a b i l i t y” that Ca lif or nia wo uld a

pp ly § 11 35 9 to c on du c t no t r e la te d to a contr olled substance. See G onzalez-Cervante s v. Holder , 709 F.3d 1265, 1266 (9th Cir. 2013) (interna l quotation marks omitted). J ust as § 11359 is categorically a “c ontrolled substance of

fense ” for

sent en cing purposes, Sa nd ov alVene gas , 2 92 F .3 d at 11 07 , it is cate g or ic a lly

a c ri me
“ re la tin g t o a

c on tr oll e d s ub sta

nc e ” fo r i mmi g ra

tio n p ur po se s. P ETIT ION DE NI ED

.