Antonio Chancoy-Tonoc v. Eric Holder, Jr.
519 F. App'x 326
5th Cir.2013Background
- Chancoy-Tonoc, a Guatemalan native, petitions for review of the BIA's dismissal of his appeal and denial of cancellation of removal.
- The BIA affirmed the IJ’s finding that Chancoy-Tonoc is removable and denied his cancellation request.
- Chancoy-Tonoc contends his Texas § 22.01 assault of a family member offense is not a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT).
- He argues the assault was reckless, not intentional, and § 22.01(a) requires only bodily injury, not serious bodily injury.
- The court applies a two-part standard: defer to the BIA on the definition of CIMT and review de novo the elements of the offense under the BIA’s CIMT definition.
- Because Texas § 22.01 is disjunctive, it is not categorically CIMT; the court uses the modified categorical approach to examine the conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 22.01(a)(1) can be a CIMT under the modified categorical approach. | Chancoy-Tonoc argues the offense is not CIMT since it can involve reckless conduct. | BIA properly determined the offense falls within a CIMT under the relevant subsection. | Yes; BIA's CIMT determination was reasonable. |
Key Cases Cited
- Esparza-Rodriguez v. Holder, 699 F.3d 821 (5th Cir. 2012) (modified categorical approach for disjunctive §22.01; some subsections involve CIMT)
- Amouzadeh v. Winfrey, 467 F.3d 451 (5th Cir. 2006) (two-step CIMT review; defer to BIA on definition, de novo on element fit)
- Hamdan v. INS, 98 F.3d 183 (5th Cir. 1996) (BIA's CIMT definition must be upheld if reasonable)
- Esparza-Rodriguez v. Holder, 699 F.3d 821 (5th Cir. 2012) (cited for CIMT analysis under disjunctive statute §22.01)