Opinion ID: 3165719
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: When the person took or drove the vehicle,

Text: [he] [she] had the specific intent to deprive 20 Jury instructions are Shepard “approved” documents only when they are submitted in the underlying action as part of the record. Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13, 20–21 (2005). Jury instructions do not exist in this case where Almanza pleaded guilty. 21 The use of the pattern CALJIC jury instructions is “not mandated by statute, [but] their use is recommended by the Judicial Council of California (Cal. Standards Jud. Admin., § 5).” People v. Prettyman, 926 P.2d 1013, 1021 (Cal. 1996). “[T]he Judicial Council has recommended their use, when applicable, ‘unless the trial judge finds that a different instruction would more adequately, accurately or clearly state the law.’” Mitchell v. Gonzales, 819 P.2d 872, 884 n.2 (Cal. 1991) (Kennard, J., dissenting) (alteration omitted) (citing Cal. Standards Jud. Admin., § 5)). ALMANZA-ARENAS V. LYNCH 25 the owner either permanently or temporarily of [his] [her] title to or possession of the vehicle. This jury instruction makes clear that California law treats the disjunctive phrases in the statute as means of committing the offense not separate elements creating new crimes. Therefore, the distinction between whether Almanza intended to permanently or temporarily deprive the owner of his or her vehicle need not be determined by an unanimous jury. Thus, section 10851(a) is an indivisible statute. This conclusion ends our inquiry; we need not proceed to step three. We have “examine[d] what the state conviction necessarily involved, not the facts underlying the case, [and] we must presume that the conviction rested upon nothing more than the least of the acts criminalized.” Moncrieffe v. Holder, 133 S. Ct. 1678, 1684 (2013) (internal quotation marks and alterations omitted) (emphasis added). Because the least of the acts criminalized under section 10851(a) is a temporary taking, the statute is not categorically a crime involving moral turpitude. The petitions for review are GRANTED, and the matter is REMANDED to the BIA for further proceedings. 26 ALMANZA-ARENAS V. LYNCH OWENS, Circuit Judge, joined by TALLMAN, BYBEE, and