Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/147500301/Maria-Isabel-Perez-Castro-A095-266-046-BIA-Sept-5-2012
Timestamp: 2016-09-01 02:00:24
Document Index: 121611445

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1292', '§ 1182', '§ 1229', '§ 1003', '§ 110', '§ 1229', '§ 1240', '§ 18', '§ 18', '§ 18', '§ 18', '§ 18', '§ 18', '§ 18']

BrowseBrowseInterestsBiography & MemoirBusiness & LeadershipFiction & LiteraturePolitics & EconomyHealth & WellnessSociety & CultureHappiness & Self-HelpMystery, Thriller & CrimeHistoryYoung AdultBrowse byBooksAudiobooksComicsSheet MusicBrowse allUploadSign inJoinBooksAudiobooksComicsSheet MusicWelcome to Scribd! Start your free trial and access books, documents and more.Find out moreHernandez, Christine M., Esq.Hernandez & Associates, P.C. 1490 Lafyette Street, Suite 307 Denver, CO 80218 U.S. Department of Justice Executive Offce fr imigtion Review Board of Immigatio1 Appeals Ofce of the Clerk JI07LòwPæ,µile2
Fw0Chw VUn JJWf
DHS/ICE Ofice of Chief Counsel • DEN 1245 East Caley Avenue Centennial, CO 80111-5663 Name: PEREZ-CASTRO, MARIA ISABEL A 095-266-46 Date of this notice: 9/5/2012 Enclosed is a copy of te Board's decision ad order in te above-referenced case. Enclos Panel Member: Pauley, Roger Sincere1y, DO c t Do1a Car Chief Clek schwarA Useream: pocket I
Cite as: Maria Isabel Perez-Castro, A095 266 046 (BIA Sept. 5, 2012)
PERE-CASTRO, MARI ISABEL A095-266.46 DENVER CONTRACT DET. FAC 3130 N. OAKLND STREET AUROR, CO 80010 U.S. Department ot· Justice Exeutive Ofce fr Immigation Review Board of Immigaton Appeals Ofce of the Clerk Jf0ÎÍ0wmMæJWP
FzÌbLhw, Y/rnla J¿01¡
OHS/ICE Ofce of Chief Counsel • DEN 12445 East Caley Avenue Centennial, CO 80111-5663 Name: PERE-CASTRO, MARIA ISABEL A 095·266.46 Date of this notice: 9/5/2012 Enclosed is a copy of te Board's decision in the above-referenced case. This cop is being provided to you d a couresy. You attorey or representative bas been sered with this decision pursut to 8 C.F.R. § 1292.S(a). If te atached decisioU order that you be removed fom the United States or afus an Immigtion Judge's decision orderng tat you be rmoved, any pttion fr review of the atached decision must be fled with ad received by te apprpriate cour of appeÜlb ·itin 30 days of te date of the decision. Enclosure Pane Member: Pauley, Roger Sincerely, DO c C Dona Car
Chief Clerk schwarA Useream: Docket I
U.S. Deparent of Justce Eeuve Ofc fr lmgo Revie Decision of te B of Im igion Apeal Falls CW, Viiia 201 File: A095 266 06 - Auor CO Date: I D- M ISAEL PEREZ-ASTO a.k.a. Isabel Per I RMOVA PROCEEDIGS APEA ON BEHALF OF RESPONENT: Chsne M. Heradez Esquire ON BEHF OF OHS: Lila Cronf el Asst Chief Cousel CHRGE: SEP - 5 2012 Notce: Se. 212(a)(6){A)i}, I&N Act (8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i)] -
Present without bing adite or paoled APLICATION: Te repondent, a native and citzen of Mexic, appeals te Imgation Judge's Aprl 3, 2012, de
cision denyig her applications fr cacellaton of removal and voluntr depa wder ston 240A()( l ) ad 240B(b) oftelmgrion ad Nationalit Act, 8U.S.C. §§ 1229b()(l), 1229c(b). Te rspondent's apeal wll be dismissed. We rview the fdings of fact made by te ligtion Judge, includg the detenination of crdibilit, fr cle eror. 8 C.F .R. § l 03.1 (d)(JXi). We reiew all oter issues, icluding wheer te paes have met the rlevat buden of proof ad isus of discrtion de novo. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1 (d)(3Xii). Te resondent's applicaton fr relief, whch Y fle ar My 11, 2005, is govere by the aendmets made t te Act by the R I Act. See Mater of S-B-, 24 I&N Dec. 42 (BI 2006). At issue in ths mater is wheter the resndent• s 2011 conviction of atemptd seond dege
burgla uder sections 18-4-203(1) ad 18-2-101 of the Colordo Revised Stts is a crme involving morl turitde such tht the respondent is ineligble fr both cacellaton ofreova ad volut depe. See sct
on l 0 l (f(3 }, 212( a)(2)(A)(i)(I, 240A(b )( 1 )(C), ad 240B( )(1 )(B) of te Act, 8 U.S.C. §§ 110l(t(l),l182(2)(A)()(, rspctively. At te outst, we emphiz tat the rsondet concees she is inadissible uder section 212(a)(6)(A)(i) of the Act a chged by the Depaent of Homelad Secut (DHS) (I.J. at 1; Tr. at 1). Te rsndent is sekng rlief fm rmova ad therfr ha te buden of proof to esblish eligbiJit fr tat rlief See setion 240(c)(4) ofte Act 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(4); 8 C.F.R. § 1240.S(d); Gacia V. Holdr, 584 F.3d 1288 (10 Cir. 2009); Mater of Alma, 24 l&N De. 771 (BIA 2009). Te rpondent cncee te stat wder whch she wa convicted is a divisible st, meang tat at lea a pron of te statte i
s a cre ivolving mor titude (Rendent•s Br. at 8). Accrdigly, it is te I
A095 266 046 repondet,s buden to pret sufcient evidence to establish she Ynot convicted unde a poron of te stte in which mor tpitude inheres. Matter of Almana, supra, at 774-76. To dete if a ofen is a crme involving mor titude we apply a tepa aaysis. See Matter of Silva-Treino, 24 I&N Dec. 687, 699-70 (A.O. 2008). Fis, we eaine te stt at issue to acerin wheter mor titde is intnsic t al ofenss t have a "rc prbabilit" of being prsecuted uder the stute. Mater of Silva-Trevino, supra, a 689-90, 696-97. If the isue canot be rsolved uder the categorcal apprach, ¼ apply a moded categorcl approah, where we exaine specifc documents comprising te rord of cnvicton t detenine te nate of te uderying convicton. Id. at 690, 698-99. Fially, if the rord of convcton is inconcluive we cnider evidence bond te reor of convicton to evaluate whether the ofens cnstit a cre involving moral tpitde. Id. at 690, 698-99.1 We afte Im igton Judge's denaton tat in light of te resondent's convicton of the ofense of atemptd second degee bugla under seton J 8-4-203( 1) ad 18-2-101 of the Colordo Revised State she ha not estblished eligibilit fr either cacellation of removal or volut depae (l.J. at 2-3, 9). Unlawl ent into the dwelling of aother, or rmag uawfUy in such a dwelling afer a lawl or ulawl ent, wth the intent to c!l t ay crme, is a crime involving mor titde. Matter of Louissaint, 24 l&N De. 754g 759 (I 2009). Te rcrd refe. tt te rndent pleaded guilty to tng a substta sep towd the comission of seond dege bura by "(u]nlawlly, felonously, ad kowingly rmain[ing] uawflly afer a law or ulawfl ent ito the building or occupied stucte of Frcisco Maia­
Aceveo ... wth the intent to comit theri the crme of hasment .. . " (x. 3 at 49; Exh. 6 at 3
). Tu, te deterinatve queston with respet to te respondent's eligibilit fr rliefis wheter she esblised tat the ten "dwellig" a considere Mater of Louissaint, supra, ctgorcly fals outside te deftion of"building or occupied stcte" uder the it sttut, or that te recrd discloses that it falls outside of tat defniton in ts paicula ce. O appeal, the repondent ague bth tat the ten "dwellig
, falls ently outside the defniton of"building or occupied stte" ad that the recrd establishes her paticula ofene did not involve a "dweJling." We fnd neite agment perusive. Fit, the respondent paes te stattor defnition of "buildng,'' "ocuied sct," ad "dwelling," ad agues tat "[a]s 'dwellig' is defned, in Coloro, a a t of buidig, not a occupied stcte, it fllows tat a ulawfl ent of a occupied stctue ca never be fud to be a dwelling'' (espondent's Br. at 11). We fnd ts aguent unpeÏive. Baed on te stutor defitions of the relevat ten s, it is more accurte to say ever "dweUing
, is als "a occupied st
, ad a "buldg,'' but tat not ever "occupie stct" or "bulding
, is a "dwelling." Under Colordo law the ten "building" meas: a st c �ch ha te cpait to conti� ad is desiged fr te sheltr of ma, animals, or prper, ad includes a shp, tiler, sleeping ca, alae, or oter ` Te Tent CiÏuit i whch tis cae aises ha not yet adressed whether t defer to te methodolog in Mater of Sila-Trevino. See Efagene v. Holder, 62 F.3d 918 (10 Ci. 2011 ). 2 I
A05 266 06 vehicle or place adapted fr overght acomodations of peon or aas, or fr crng on of buiness tein, weter or not a peron or aa is aly prent. Colo. Rev. Stt.§ 18-4-101(1). Te ten "'Occupied stctue" meas: ay a plae, failit, or enclosu whc� fr paicula puroses, may b ud by peron or as upn ocion, whether or not inclued within the defnition of "building', in subsecton (1) of ts section ad which is in fact ocupie by a pron or amal. ad kow by te defendt to b thus ocuied at the time he a in violation of one or more of sction 18-4-102 to 18-105. Colo. Rev. St. § 18--101(2) (emphais adde). Te ter Hdwelling" mea "[a] building which is used, intended t be ued, or ully ue by a pron fr habiton.,, Colo. Rev. Stt § 18-1-9
1 (3)(g) (emphais adde). Cont to te rspndent's contento� it is cle t te ter "dwellig" fals wtn the defnition of bot "occupied stct" ad "buildig." Ever "dwelling
als ÇFts te defnition of "occMpie stctr" ad buldig- Converly, sme "occupie stcts" or "bulding �e "dwelligs." Te tenW not d the rspndent suggest, mutually exclusi
ve. Terefre, the rpondent caQot estblish she did not plea gilty to bugla of a d¾llig by etablishing mely tt she pleaded guilt to only t bugla of a "buldg" or "ocupied stce" (see Ex. 3 at 49; Ex. 6 at 333). Wle we agee wit te respondent that the trs a not synonyous, te use of the gene trs "bulding" or uoccupied strcte" does not excludete moresifctr "dwellig" (Respondentts Br. a 11). Tu, te respondent's reliac on te defton of te vaious ter is mslac ad does not estblis she wa not convct of bula of dwellig, ta te ofense is not a crme involving morl titde. or that she is eligibJ� to apply fr ccellation of rmoval or volunta depa. We also rjÛt te Mspndents aguent that beause the rord refects she ¾convcted of Ü clas S felony
, she cÜMld not have be convicted of bugla of Ü dwellig (esndnt's Br. a 10-11). Seond dege bugla is a clas 4 felony. Colo. Rev. St. § 18--203(2). Atempte secnd dege bugla is a clas S felony. Colo. Rev. Sta.§ 18-2-101(4). However, snd degre bÚgla of a dwÔlling is d clas 3 felony. Colo. Rev. Sta. § 18-4M203(2)(a). AteUpt second degee bugla of dwelling is a clas 4 felony. Colo. Rev. Stt. § 18-2-101 ( 4). Te respondent contends that beaue she wa convicted of a class 5 felony, she wa not convicted of atempted seond dege bua of a dwellig, ad becu te Úderyg ofen she intnde to cmt wa haÞent wich te resondent contnds fhe is not a crime involvng mora tuitde. she ha not ben convictd of Û cre involving mor titde (espondents Br. at 10-11). We ae upraded by ts aent Colorao coms have cnclude tat te inÜ fom a clas 4 felony to a clas 3 felony fr seond degee bugla of a "dwelling
,, is a sentc encment, not a element of the stt. See People V. Gacia, 940 P.2d 357, 359·63 (Colo. J 997). Tus, te DeÏe fact tat the respndent ¾d peIited to ente a plea of glt wtout tis sentence enacement bÜig ips does not mea she ha establishe she ½ not convcted of the ofense of bugla of a dwelliDg- A discussed prviously, te ten dwelling falls wt the defton of bt "buiding" ad occuied sc." Tu, by enterng a ple of glt to cout S of the aeded complait. te respondent admitted t a chage tat iplicitly include te possibilit tat she cmitte buglar of a dwelling. Te fct that the rspondent ¼ prt 3 I
A095 266 046 to plead gilty to a clas S felony estblishes ony tat the sentence enacement was not aplie to her, not that te "buildig,, or "ocupied stcte" she· reaie i uawfly with te itnt to comt te ofene of hasment ¾ not a "dwelling." I su
, we conclude tat te mere fat tht te setence enacment fr comtg second degee bWgla of a dwllig ¼ not imposed i this matter does not ater the statutor elements of the ofense or etblish tat te "bulding" or "occupied stctu" i queon W not a "dwelling,,, as te late tenis include wt te defntion of te frer ten. We emphaiz tt the rsult i ths mater hinge on wher te bmen of prof Hes. Te abigut crete by te interlay of the complement defnitions of "buldig," "ocupied stct,,, ad "dwelling" mes tat the pa with the buden of proof relate t whether the ofense is a cre involving moral tuitde canot Deet tt buden by showing a bar conviction of a clas 4 felony second dege burgla ofens. Finaly we note tat the rndent did not submit additonal evidence outside the rcor of cnvicton to establish tat te "building'' or "occupied stcte" wa not a "dwelling.,, See Mater of Silva-Trevino, spra, at 699-704. Ideed, te evdence of rord establishes tt te respondent comted burgla of the dwelling of Frcisco Maia-Acevedo (I.J. at 2-3; Ex. 7; Tr. at 13). Tu, we afthe Immigtion Judge's deterinton tat in light of te rondent's convicton of atempte second degee burgla uder seton 18-4-203( 1) ad 18-2-101 of te Colordo Revise Stte, whch the respndent has not established did not ivolve te burgla of a dwelling, she ha not established she bas not ben convicted of a crme involving moral titude uder Mater of Louissaint, supra, ad resultatly has not estalished eligbilit fr eiter cacllaton of removal or volut depare uder sctions 240A(b )(1 )(C) ad 240B(b )(1 )(B) of te Act.2 Gacia v. Holder, spra. Accordingly, te fllowig orde wll be eter. ORER: Te repndent
s appeal is dismissed. ¯ In Jigt of ts detaton we ned not consider the oter issues risd by te respondent on appl rlat to her eligbilit fr t rlief sought (Respndent's Br. at 13-23). 4 I
•· \ UITED STATES DEPATME OF JSTICE EECTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRTION REVIEW UITED STATES IMMIGRTION COUT AUROR, COLORDO Pile: A095-266-046 April 3, 2012 In the Matter of MARIA ISAEL PEREZ-CASTRO ) ) ) ) IN REOVAL PROCEEDINGS RESPONET CHGES: Present without being inspected and admitted. APPLICTIONS: cancellation of removal for a non-permaett resident. ON BEHF OF RESPONDET: CHRISTINE HERAEZ ON BEHLF OF DRS: LEILA CRONFEL 4 ´
� * J
OR DECISION OF TE IMMIGRTION JGE The respondent is 30 years old, a native and citizen of Mexico. She admits that she arrived without inspection near Sa Ysidro, Califoria in Augst of 1996, and I find that chare is sustained. She had applied for cancellation of removal, which is Exibit 2. She must meet all the reqirements. The reqirements are that she has been physically present in the - I I
\ ... United States for at least"the past 10 years; that she has been a person of good moral character during that time; she mst show that she has a spouse, parent, or child who is a citizen or resident; and tha� the relative would suffer exceptional and extremely unusual hardship if she is removed. The first issue in the case is whether she might be disqalified because of a conviction. Te respondent was convicted of attempted second degree burglary, and cousel has submitted the conviction records in Eibit b She pled to a count which said that she kowingly remained unlawfully after a lawful or unlawful entry into the building or occupied strcture of Francisco Macias Ac£rt(with the intent to commit harassment. It is a felony 5. Eibit 6, page 333. The Board of Immigration Appeals has examined burglar in Matter of Louissaint, 24 I& Dec. 754 (BIA 2009), and the Board held that "the conscious and overt act of ulawfully entering or remaining in õ occupied dwelling with intent to commit a crime is inherently reprehensible conduct committed with some form of scienter, as reqired by Matter of Silva-
Trevino." It held that the unlawful entr into the dwelling with intent to commit any crime is a crime involving moral turitude. Therefore, the burglar does DOT OBNO to have the intention to commit a crime involving moral turpitude but it must involve a dwelling. A095-266-046 2 April 3, 2012 I
\. .. \ The statute that she was convicted uder is divisible because it ca have d lawful or unlawful entry and it can be an occupied stTcture or a building. Based upon the police report and the respondent's testimony, J fiOd that this is a crime involving moral turpitude. It is not a petty offense, ad therefore, 1 find that she is disqalified from this application because she has not show good moral character. Eibit J has been submitted. The respondent admits that she went iOto her husband's apartment without invitation with a key that she had. The police report says she hit him on the head, ad the police obsered blood on his head, although she denies that. It was an occupied strcture and not B building. It was a uinvited entr, and J find that under the modified categorical approach, it is a crime involving moral turpitude. However, this certainly is a debatable issue in the case, and because of that, I have decided to let cousel put the case on so that I can make alternative findings. The respondent testified that she has her mother in the United States, a U.S. citizen, who testified today. Her father is a permanent resident. Her mother has 11 children altogether. There are six in Califoria, three in Colorado, and a brothØ\ in MeYiLo - The respondent is the beneficiary of a visa petition from her sister in 1998 ad her mother in 2000, but there is B waiting period of anywhere from thTee to seven years for those petitions. She testified that her motherg ·who is 69, is dependent on her for A095-266-046 3 April 3, 2012 I
�Hb rning errandsJ making sue she takes her medicationso Her mother sometimes is forgetful, and she takes care of her. She has several medical problems, including high blood pressure¿
cholesterol, diabetes, heres B��taractsg She and her sister and the mother all testified that no one else of the 11 children ca take care of the mother if the respondent has to live in Mexico. At the present time, her sister Maria Perez is taking care of the mother and the respondent's daughter. However, she is getting frustrated. She is going through a divorce and she has told the respondent that she really canot do it anyre. The respondent has a child with this man that she had the problem with, Francisco Macias AtV'/and that child is I Sarah Joana Elizabeth Macias-Perez, age 3, a United States citizen. She has had a relationship with Francisco since October 2007 and she claimed that he was violent, that he would tr to strangle her, that he would get drun ad beat her u, that he cheated on her and lied to her. Nevertheless, she did go back to him after they were separated one time, apparently hoping that he would change. He also threatened her that he would take the child to Mexico if she ever reported him. As to the incident, she claims that she filed for child support in November of 2009, and he retaliated against her. She said that she had the keys to the apartment and went into the apartment, and there was a woma in there with him in A095-266-046 9 April 3, 2012 I
bed. The police report says nothing about this, but the respondent says that the woman left. The respondeIt admits he was bleeding from the head but has no idea how that happened . The police report in the Government's exhibit says that the respondent had a knife, that she made several cuts of the knife and hit the television set and the bed clothing,fays the husband was asleep when he was attacked, and all of this is in Exhibit 7. Ad also, the police report on page 5 of that exhibit says, •J obsered a large abrasion on the left side of Francisco's head. He also had several scratches on his left eye, right arm, left ar, and back. Photographs were taken of the da0age to the apartment, as well as the injuries on Francisco." At any rate, the respondent said she did not know that she had to go to court and she did not go to court, although she talked to an attorney, A nd also I should say she admitted that she broke some items in the apartment but not anything beyond that. She said that they talked, and he calmed dow, ad then she did not see him util the next year in March, ad he apologized and he started giving her money, so they had some relationship again. Then she had another incident with him, show in Exhibit 8, in 2011. She went to the police to report it, and the police foud the old warrant and arrested her, and she pled guilty to the old offense, not the new one. The trial attorey A095-266-046 5 April 3, 20J2 I
\ pointed out that he told the police she had rasacked his home, that she threw hot sauce all over the place, that she threw items in the toil
t, but she denies all of that, and of course she was not convicted of thaty so it is not held against her. She said if she goes to Mexico, she would have to take her daughter, but not her mother. She said her mother is afraid of the mother's ex-husband because he was violent and he goes to Mexico sometimes and when he does, he stays in the brother's home, according to one witness ø
Ad the respondent also had her mother testify« She is 68. She talked aout her medical situation and said none of the other J± can support her. She did testify that she applied for some tye of Social Security and she was approved but she has no idea exactly what the limits are of that¿ and there is no evidence whatsoever to say what Social Security has done with her case o The respondent said her mother ows a business in California, but it is only in name, that it is actually the brother's business. Ad her sister Maria Salud Perez-Castro testified on the phone for a minute but had problems with the baby then, and so that was cut short, but she said she ca barely support herself, and it is very difficult for her to take care of her mother and the child, and hopes that the respondent ca help her with that. Respondent's mother said she canot go to Mexico A095-266-046 6 April 3, 2012 I
because she is afraid there. She says that she cannot go to Califoria because she does not like it there and that she would really miss her daughter and she is very comfortale and happy living with her daughter. Ad Cecilia Perez-Castro also testified that there is no one in the family who ca take care of the mother, essentially that she would be indigent without this respondent, and she too testified briefly that when people go to Mexico, they stay in the brother's home, but it is not a home which will accommodate another family. Ad I have read all of the exibits of the respondent, showing that she is well- regarded by many people as being a hard worker and that she is of good character, has tried to support her child, takes care of her mother, and works two jobs in order to do that. Ad I have also read the material showing that there ie a miserable situation in Mexico with gang violence and cCrruption . Trning to the record, first, I find the respondent is not eligible because she has been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude. 1 find she has not shown good moral character. Secondly, as to hardship to the child, it is noted that the child would accompay the mother. There is no suggestion of ay medical problem of the child or anythng else that would cause severe problems in Mexico. It is noted that the brother has a house there, even though it is very modest. Ad I know that this would cause some suffering on the part of the child to get A095-266-046 Ý April 3, 2012 I
used to a new life, but it is not exceptional and it is not extremely unusual. As to the mother, I have to say that first, there is no financial problem show because she claims that she has been approved for some type of Social Security, and obviously, out of 11 children, one would think that when she is receiving her SSI, somebody can take her in ad help her or she can do it herself. J do not mea to diminish the hardship that the respondent's mother would suffer because she is very attached to her daughter. To her, it is ver important, and it is a difficult thing because she has lived with her daughter and has come to rely on her. But I cannot find that it is exceptional or extremely uusual type of hÐrdshipy taking all the facts of the case. Many of the things that respondent does for her, such as taking her for appointments, can be done P!· anyone, ad fraly, I do not believe �he testimony of any of the three that there is simply no one else that would take care of their elderly mother. Ad finally, as to respondent's exlanations of being the victim, it is noted that she is the one that pled guilty to O felony. She has the restraining order against her. There is õ very specific police report obsering an injur to the husband and damage to the property, J do not believe heZ story that she came in and foud a woma in there and that the WomÐ fled. There is nothing in the police report. Te respondent did not A095-266-046 Û April 3, 2012 I
( tr to correct tne record or go to trial. guilty to this crime. }|
·¹¬
She simply pled Ad accordingly, I find the applications should be denied. They are denied for failure to meet the reqirements of hardship and good moral character, and volutar departure will not be granted because in this second step of volutar departure, she canot show eligibility, again because of the crime. So cancellation of ·removal is denied, and it is ordered that she be remo�ed to Mexico. A095-266-046 J. P. VAELLO Immigration Judge 9 �
.· � �
April 3, 2012 �
`", I
CERTIFICATE PAGE l hereby certify that the attached proceeding before JDGE J. P. VANDELLO, in the matter of: MARIA ISABEL PEREZ-CASTRO A095-266-046 AURORA, COLORDO is an accurate, verbatim transcript of the recording as provided by the Executive Office for Imigration Review and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the Executive Office for Imigration Review. G
� GRCE SHIPPS (Transcriber) DEPOSITION SERVICES, MY 11, 2012 {Completion Date) Inq. -· .
¯ '•
ª Î
f `·3
Maria Isabel Perez-Castro, A095 266 046 (BIA Sept. 5, 2012) by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC56 viewsEmbedDownloadDescriptionIn this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) found the respondent ineligible for cancellation of removal for nonpermanent residents upon finding she failed to carry her burd...In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) found the respondent ineligible for cancellation of removal for nonpermanent residents upon finding she failed to carry her burden of demonstrating that her conviction for second degree burglary under Colo. Rev. Stat. 18-4-203(1) was not a crime involving moral turpitude. The decision was written by Member Roger Pauley. Interests: Types, Government & PoliticsRead on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.Copyright: Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)Download as PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate contentShow moreShow less
RelatedFall Alumni Newsletterby New England Law ReviewEpifanio Martinez Juarez, A095 194 852 (BIA March 21, 2011)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCOmar Alberto Cisneros-Ordaz, A045 124 831 (BIA May 10, 2011)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCGregorio Vergara, A076 110 704 (BIA March 8, 2011)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCYork County court schedule for 6/24/15by HafizRashidMario Nunez Parra, A092 283 469 (BIA Nov. 16, 2012)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCTokhtakhounov, Alimzhan Et Al. Indictmentby Dan DuraySalvador Espinoza Gonzalez, A021 576 036 (BIA Dec. 13, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCReading List on criminal procedure in ugandaby muhumuzaOlumide Goodness Adeyinka, A099 182 755 (BIA April 15, 2011)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCCarl freer Money lawyers: No holds barredby Carl FreerSantino Fabian Alarcon-Gomez, A201 227 554 (BIA Apr. 2, 2014)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCReply legal Notice by Gomathi Sankara Narayanan VenkataramanSalvador Jr. Villareal, A092 722 540 (BIA March 17, 2011)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCInder Singh & Ors vs State of Rajasthan on 6 January, 2015by sreeranganRaul Sainz-Rivera, A091 684 104 (BIA Mar. 10, 2014)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC9_confession in Criminal Casesby kamal025Deborah Ann Romero, A017 176 264 (BIA June 10, 2014)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCJose Alfredo Quijada, A092 041 082 (BIA Feb. 4, 2016)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCDieuvu Forvilus, A071 552 965 (BIA Jan. 28, 2014)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCJudge Pimentel Crim Transcript - Book 2by Anne DemJose Armando Cruz, A087 241 021 (BIA Apr. 9, 2014)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC94 Community Newsletter January 2014by Stephen LevinLetter and Article on Arnold Police Department Corruptionby Leviathan57Cae Result Students' Book Keys - Unit 09by Alejandro Sosa De GreefPenology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.pdfby Abdul GhaffarPeople v. Bausingby Phiels DalangUntitledby api-121480034Similar to Maria Isabel Perez-Castro, A095 266 046 (BIA Sept. 5, 2012)Fall Alumni NewsletterEpifanio Martinez Juarez, A095 194 852 (BIA March 21, 2011)Omar Alberto Cisneros-Ordaz, A045 124 831 (BIA May 10, 2011)Gregorio Vergara, A076 110 704 (BIA March 8, 2011)York County court schedule for 6/24/15Mario Nunez Parra, A092 283 469 (BIA Nov. 16, 2012)Tokhtakhounov, Alimzhan Et Al. IndictmentSalvador Espinoza Gonzalez, A021 576 036 (BIA Dec. 13, 2013)Reading List on criminal procedure in ugandaOlumide Goodness Adeyinka, A099 182 755 (BIA April 15, 2011)Carl freer Money lawyersSantino Fabian Alarcon-Gomez, A201 227 554 (BIA Apr. 2, 2014)Reply legal Notice Salvador Jr. Villareal, A092 722 540 (BIA March 17, 2011)Inder Singh & Ors vs State of Rajasthan on 6 January, 2015Raul Sainz-Rivera, A091 684 104 (BIA Mar. 10, 2014)9_confession in Criminal CasesDeborah Ann Romero, A017 176 264 (BIA June 10, 2014)Jose Alfredo Quijada, A092 041 082 (BIA Feb. 4, 2016)Dieuvu Forvilus, A071 552 965 (BIA Jan. 28, 2014)Judge Pimentel Crim Transcript - Book 2Jose Armando Cruz, A087 241 021 (BIA Apr. 9, 2014)94 Community Newsletter January 2014Letter and Article on Arnold Police Department CorruptionCae Result Students' Book Keys - Unit 09Penology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.pdfPeople v. BausingUntitledPeople vs GodoyProof that Ray Jennings is innocent.pdf