Opinion ID: 2782335
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Particularly Serious Crime Determination

Text: ʺThe Immigration and Nationality Act bars the grant of asylum or withholding of removal to an alien whom the Attorney General ʹdeterminesʹ or ʹdecidesʹ has ʹbeen convicted by a final judgment of a particularly serious crime.ʹʺ Nethagani v. Mukasey, 532 F.3d 150, 152 (2d Cir. 2008) (quoting 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(b)(2)(A)(ii) (asylum), 1231(b)(3)(B)(ii) (withholding of removal)). ʺThe Attorney General (or his agents) may determine that a crime is particularly -14- serious . . . even though it is not an aggravated felony.ʺ Id. at 156 (asylum); see also Ahmetovic v. INS, 62 F.3d 48, 52 (2d Cir. 1995) (withholding of removal). Flores contends that the agency erred in finding that his convictions under N.Y. Penal Law § 130.65 were particularly serious crimes without independently analyzing whether he posed a danger to the community. We have accorded Chevron deference, however, to the BIAʹs interpretation that no separate danger to the community analysis is required when determining whether a crime is particularly serious. See Nethagani, 532 F.3d at 154 n.1 (ʺ[T]he BIA has held that [an] alien [convicted of a particularly serious crime] necessarily constitutes ʹa danger to the community of the United States.ʹ We have accepted the BIAʹs interpretation of the statute.ʺ (citing Ahmetovic, 62 F.3d at 52‐53)). Flores has therefore failed to demonstrate error in the agencyʹs determination that he is ineligible for asylum and withholding of removal because his convictions under N.Y. Penal Law § 130.65 were particularly serious crimes.