Case Name: Moises NAVARRO-SOQUI, aka Moises Navarro aka Jose Manuel Cota, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-01-20
Citations: 362 F. App'x 783
Docket Number: No. 04-76126
Parties: Moises NAVARRO-SOQUI, aka Moises Navarro aka Jose Manuel Cota, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: PREGERSON, HALL and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 362
Pages: 783–785

Head Matter:
Moises NAVARRO-SOQUI, aka Moises Navarro aka Jose Manuel Cota, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 04-76126.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 2, 2008.
Filed Jan. 20, 2010.
Mario Acosta, Jr., Esquire, Martinez Goldsby & Associates, Elsa Ines Martinez, Esquire, Law Offices of Elsa Martinez, PLC, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.
Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, OIL, Aviva Poczter, Senior Litigation Counsel, Patricia Ann Smith, Senior Litigation Counsel, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Offiee of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: PREGERSON, HALL and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
An immigration judge found Moisés Navarro-Soqui ("Navarro-Soqui") removable as an aggravated felon due to his conviction under Cal.Penal Code § 288(c)(1) and ordered him removed to Mexico. The Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") affirmed the immigration judge and dismissed Navarro-Soqui's appeal. Navarro-Soqui petitions this court for review. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition.
In determining whether a state criminal conviction constitutes an aggravated felony under federal law, this court applies the categorical approach set out in Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575, 599-602, 110 S.Ct. 2143, 109 L.Ed.2d 607 (1990). There is a categorical match between CaLPenal Code § 288(c)(1) and the generic crime of sexual abuse of a minor — an aggravated felony. This Court previously has held that a conviction under Cal.Penal Code § 288(a), which criminalizes lewd and lascivious acts with minors under 14 years old, constitutes an aggravated felony. See United States v. Medina-Villa, 567 F.3d 507 (9th Cir.2009); United States v. Baron-Medina, 187 F.3d 1144 (9th Cir.1999). Subsection (c)(1) differs from subsection (a) in that it addresses lewd and lascivious acts solely with fourteen and fifteen year old minors and requires that the perpetrator be more than ten years older than the minor. These distinctions are immaterial. See Estrada-Espinoza v. Mukasey, 546 F.3d 1147, 1152 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc) (holding that "sexual abuse of a minor" involves a minor between the ages of 12 and 16 and an age difference of at least four years).
Because Navarro-Soqui's conviction constitutes an aggravated felony, the BIA properly dismissed his appeal. It is irrelevant for purposes of federal law that Navarro-Soqui's state conviction was reduced to a misdemeanor. See United States v. Alvarez-Gutierrez, 394 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir.2005).
For these reasons we DENY the petition for review.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.