Interim Decision *M66 

MAl 1ER OF JUAREZ 

In Deportation Proceedings 

A-27582484 

Decided by Board April 29, .1988 

Except possibly under unusual circumstances not present here, a 

single conviction for a misdemeanor offense is not a "particularly 

serious crime" within the scope of section 243(h)(2)(B) of the Trnmigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1253(h)(2)(B) (1982). 

CHARGE: 

Order: Act of 1952—Sec. 241(aX2) [8 U.S.C. § 1251(aX2)]—Entered without impaction 

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: ON BEHALF OF SERVICE: 

William Drysdale, Esquire Beverley Phillips 

1918 Lake Shore Avenue, Suite 65 General Attorney 

Oakland, California 94606 

BY: Milhollan, Chairman; Dunne, Morris, Vacca, and Heilman, Board Members 

In a decision dated May 5, 1987, an immigration judge found the 

respondent deportable as charged under section 241(aX2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1251(a)(2) (1982), denied 

his requests for asylum and withholding of deportation under sections 208(a) and 248(h) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(a) and 1253(h) 

(1982), and ordered him deported to Guatemala_ The respondent 

has appealed. The record will be remanded. 

The respondent is a 32-year-old native and citizen of Guatemala 

who entered the United States near San Ysidro, California, in June 

1983 without inspection. The record reflects that the respondent 

was convicted upon a plea of guilty in the Municipal Court of the 

City and County of San Francisco, State of California, on July 31, 

1985, of a misdemeanor offense of assault upon. another with a 

deadly weapon. He was sentenced to 4 days' time served, 6 months' 

suspended sentence, and 2 years' probation. 

664 
Interim Decision 4t3066 

Concluding that the respondent's 1985 misdemeanor conviction 

was for a "particii arly serious crime" and that he therefore was 

statutorily ineligible for asylum and withholding of deportation, 

the iramigraticm judge declined to take the testimony of the respondent or any other witness and pretermitted further consideration of the requested relief. We do not agree with the immigration 

judge's conclusions. Except possibly under unusual circumstances 

not present here, we would not find a single conviction for a misdemeanor offense to be a "particularly serious crime" within the 

scope of section 243(h)(2)(B) of the Act. 

Ordinarily an alien seeking athniRsion as a refugee should be provided an opportunity to request asylum and withholding of deportation. See 8 C.F_R. §§ 208.10, 236.3(a) (1988); Matter of Saban, 18 

I&N Dec. 70 (131A 1981). We recognize that the right to request 

asylum or withholding of deportation generally carries with it the 

incidental right to be heard on the application, absent statutory ineligibility for the requested relief. 8 C.F.R. §§ 208.3, 208.10(a) (1988). 

Under the facts of this case we are satisfied that the respondent 

was not provided an adequate opportunity to have his requests for 

asylum and withholding of deportation considered. Accordingly, we 

will remand the record to the immigration judge for further proceedings to afford the respondent that opportunitY. 

ORDER: The record is remanded to the immigration judge for 

further proceedings consistent with the foregoing opinion and the 

entry of a new decision.