T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d byN i nth C i r c ui tR ul e 36- 3. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T BHAN W AR S. PUROHI T, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 08- 75027 A ge nc yN o. A 036- 001- 632 ME MOR AN DU M *

BHAN W AR S. PUROHI T, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 09- 73998 A ge nc yN o. A 036- 001- 632

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o a r do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls 

# FI LED JU N 30 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALST he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). 2 S ubm i tt e d M ar c h 16, 2011 ** S a n F r an c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: H U G , W . F L E T C H E R , an dM . S M IT H , C i rcu i tJu d g es. A s the f a c t s a nd pr oc e dur a l hi s t orya r e f a m i l i art o the part i e s , w e do not r e c i t e the m he r e e xc e pta s ne c e s s a ryt o e xpl a i n ourdi s pos i t i on. T h e B o ar do f I m m ig ra ti o n A p p ea ls (B IA ) p ro p er ly re jected P u ro h it ’s ar gu m entthatvo l un t ary m ansl augh t erun der C al i forni a P enalC od e § 19 2(a) do es n o t n e c e s s a r ilyin v o lv e th e u s e o f p h y s ic a l f

o r c e , se e 1 8 U .S .C . § 1 6 ( b ) ; see a l so 8 U . S . C . §§ 1101( a ) ( 43) ( F ) , 1227( a ) ( 2) ( A ) ( i i i ) . W e ha ve r e j e c t e d thi s c ont e nt i on w i th res pectt o i nv ol un t ary m ansl augh t erun der C al i forni a P enalC od e § 19 2(b), w hi ch i s m at er i al l y i dent i ca l i n al l re l evantre spec t s t o v ol un t ary m ansl augh t er u n d e rC a lif

o rn iaP e n a l C o d e § 1 9 2 ( a ) . Se e Pa rk v . I NS , 2 5 2 F .3 d1 0 1 9 , 1 0 2 2 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) , overruled i n p art on other groun ds by Ferna ndez -R uiz v . G on zales , 466 F . 3d 11 21 , 11 32 (9th C i r. 20 06 ) ( en banc). H ow ever , un der our rec entca se s, such as C ovarrubi as T eposte v . H

older , 63 2 F . 3d 10 49 , 10 52 –5 5 (9th C i r. 20 11 ), w hi ch appl i ed the “ i nt ent i on alforc e” req u i rem en test ab l i sh edb y Fe rn a n dez - R u iz , 46 6 F . 3d at11 32 , w e hol d that C a lif o rn iaP e n a l C o d e § 1 9 2 ( a ) is n o t c a te g o r ic a llyac r im e o f v io le n c e b e c au s e itA l though P ur ohi tdi d notr a i s e thi s pa rt i c ul arque s t i on i n hi s br i e f i ng t o the 1 B IA , he has a dequ at el y e xh aust ed the qu es t i on of w hether aconv i ct i on un der Ca l i f o rn i aPe n a l Co d e § 1 9 2 ( a ) c o n s t i tu t e s a n a g g r a v a t e df e l o n yu n d e r8 U . S. C. § 1 22 7(a) (2)( A )( i i i ). See V i zc arra-Ayala v. Mukasey , 5 1 4 F .3 d8 7 0 , 8 7 3

– 7 4 ( 9 th Ci r . 2 0 0 8 ) . W e th e r e f

o r e h a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e rth i s qu e s t i o n . 8 U . S. C. § 1 25 2(d)(1). 3 c a n b e c o m m itte dth r o u g h th e r e c k le s s u s e o f f o r c e , s e e P e ople v . R i os , 2 P . 3d 1 0 6 6 , 1 0 7 3 n .7 ( C a l. 2 0 0 0 ) ; P eople v . L asko , 99 9 P . 2d66 6, 67 2 (C al . 20 00 ). W e 1 rem an dfo r th e B IA t o “ ad d ress th e m o d i fi edcat eg o ri cal ap p ro ach i n th e fi rst i nst ance . ” C ortez -G ui l len v. H older , 623 F . 3d 933, 936 ( 9th C i r . 2010) ( c i t i ng I NS v. V en tu ra , 53 7 U . S . 12 (200 2) (percuri am )) . W e have j uri sdi ct i on ov erP uroh i t ’ s c hal l enge t o the B IA ’ s deni alof re l i ef u n d e rth e C o n v e n tio n A g a in s t T o rtu r e , E du v. H older , 624 F . 3d 1137, 1141–42 (9 th C i r. 2 0 1 0 ), an dth e B IA ’ s d en i al o f P u ro h i t ’ s m o t i o n t o reo p en p ro ceed i n g s, Sh arm a v. H

older , 63 3 F . 3d 86 5, 86 8 (9th C i r. 20 11 ). S ub st ant i alevi dence s up p o rts th e B I A ’s f

in d in g s r e g a r d in g th e lik e lih o o do f to rtu r e , se e W

akkaryv. H older , 558 F . 3d 1049, 1068 ( 9th C i r . 2009) , a s P ur ohi t ’ s e vi de nc e doe s not c o m p e l th e c o n c lu s io n th a t h e is b o th lik e lyto b e im p r is o n e do n a c c o u n t o f h is p r o s e ly tiz in g a n dlik e lyto b e to rtu r e dif h e is im p r is o n e d , c

f. Kh u p v . A s h c r o

ft , 376 F . 3d 898, 907 ( 9th C i r . 2004) . L i ke w i s e , P ur ohi t ’ s e vi de nc e doe s notc om pe l the c onc l us i on tha the i s l i ke l yt o be avi c t i m of a nt i - C hr i s t i an vi ol e nc e . “ W e a r e not4

i n a po si t i on t o sec on d-gu es s the [B IA ’ s] construct i on of the som ew hat c o n tr a d ic to ry ” S ta te D e p a rtm e n t r e p o rts s ub m itte db yP u r o h it. So w e v . Mukasey , 538 F . 3d 1281, 1286 ( 9th C i r . 2008) . T he e vi de nc e s ubm i tt e d i n P ur ohi t ’ s m ot i on t o r e ope n doe s note s t abl i s h tha ti tw a s “ m or e l i ke l ythan not ” tha the w oul d be to rtu r e d , Ca n o -Me r i da v . I NS , 31 1 F . 3d 96 0, 96 5– 66 (9th C i r. 20 02 ), and the B IA a c c o r d in g lyw a s w ith in its d is c r e tio n to d e n yth e m o tio n , e . g. , G u iv . I NS , 280 F . 3d 1 2 1 7 , 1 2 3 0 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 2 ) . E ach p arty sh al l b ear i t s o w n co st s. PETI TI O N G R A N TED I N PA R T A N D D EN I ED I N PA R T; RE MAND E D.