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 by9th C i r . R . 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 EN RI Q U E RO D RI G U EZ- M A CI A S, 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- 71054 A ge nc yN o. A 035- 911- 860 ME MOR AN DU M *

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 A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d M a y13, 2010 S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: R E IN H A R D T , W . F L E T C H E R an dN . R . S M IT H , C i rcu i tJu d g es. E nr i que R odr i gue z - M a c i a s pe t i t i ons f orr e vi e w of

ade c i s i on bythe B oa r d of I m m i gr a t i on A ppe a l s ( B I A ) a f f i rm i ng the or a l de c i s i on of a n i m m i gr a t i on j udge ( I J ) f i ndi ng tha tR odr i gue z - M a c i a s w a s r e m ovabl e ba s e d on hi s c onvi c t i on f or c hi l d a nnoy a nc e , i n vi ol a t i on of C a l i f orni aP e na l C ode § 647. 6( a ) . W e gr a ntthe pe t i t i on. 

# FI LED MA Y21 2 010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSB oth pa rt i e s a gr e e tha tthe m odi f i e d c a t e gor i c a l appr oa c h s houl d be 1 ap p lie d . P e titio n e rd idn o t a d d r e s s th e ap p lic ab ilityo f th e c a te g o r ic a l ap p r o a c h to th e B I A o ri n h i s o p e n i n g b r i e f , s o we d e c l i n e t o a d d r e s s i tn o w. A pp l yi ng the m od i fi ed ca t egori ca l approach, w e m ustdet erm i ne w hether R od ri gu ez -M ac i as ’ s c on vi ct i on un der C al i forni a P enal C od e § 64 7. 6(a) const i tut es ac onvi c t i on f

orc hi l d abus e . T hi s c ourti n Frego zo v. H older , 576 F . 3d 1030, 1 1 0 3 5 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 9 ) , lo o k e dto th e B I A ’s d e f in itio n o f c h ildab u s e a s s e t f

o rth in M a t ter o f V ela zq u ez-H

errera , 24 I . & N . D e c . 503 ( B I A 2008) . I n c l a r i f y i ng the B I A ’ s de f

i ni t i on, thi s c ourtnot e d tha t“ a l though ‘ c hi l d abus e ’ i s notl i m i t e d t o the i nf l i c t i on of phy s i c a l ha rm , the pe rpe tr a t or ’ s a c t i ons , e i the ri nt e nt i ona l or c r im in a llyn e g lig e n t, m u s t a c tu a llyin f lic t som e form of i nj ury on a chi l d. ” Freg o zo , 5 7 6 F .3 da t 1 0 3 7 . H e r e , th e r e le v a n t d o c u m e n t s h o w s th a t R o d r ig u e z - M a c ia s a d m itte dth a t: “O n o rab o u t A p r il 5 , 2 0 0 4 , in O r a n g e C o u n ty , [ h e ] w illf u llya n du n la w f

u lly e nga ge d i n c onduc tdi r e c t e d a ta n e l e ve n y e a rol d gi r l w hi c h w oul d di s turb a no rm al pers on w hen [he] m ade s exual com m ent s t ow ar ds her and thi s w as m o tiv a te db ya n u n n a tu r a l s e x u a l in te r e s t.” T h is d o c u m e n t is in s u f f ic ie n t to det erm i ne w hether R od ri gu ez -M ac i as ’ se ct i on 64 7. 6(a) conv i ct i on ri se s t o the l evel o f c h ildab u s e . F ir s t, C a lif o rn iaP e n a l C o d e § 6 4 7 .6 ( a ) d o e s n o t r e q u ir e th a t ac h ild a c tu a llys u f

f e rs o m e in

ju ry . See P eopl e v . L op ez , 96 5 P . 2d 71 3, 71 7 (C al . 19 98 ); s e e, e . g. , N

i cano r- R om er o v. Mukasey , 52 3 F . 3d 99 2, 10 00 (9th C i r. 20 08 ) r e v ’ d onother groun ds by M arm ol ej o-Cam

po s v . H older , 558 F . 3d 903 ( 9th C i r . 2009) ( c i t i ng c a s e s not i ng the m i ni m um c onduc tr e qui r e d f orac onvi c t i on unde rthe st atut e) . S ec on d, R od ri gu ez -M ac i as ’ s s t at em entdo es no tshow thata c hi l d w as ac tual l y i nj ured. T hu s, there i s no fac tual basi s f or concl ud i ng that R odr i gue z - M a c i a s ’ s s e c t i on 647. 6( a ) c onvi c t i on i s ac r i m e of c hi l d abus e a nd, there fore , he i s notre m ov abl e und er8 U . S . C . § 1 22 7(a) (2)( E )( i ). P E T I T I ON GR AN T E D.