Arturo Andrade-Zamora v. Loretta E. Lynch
814 F.3d 945
| 8th Cir. | 2016Background
- Andrade-Zamora, born in Mexico, entered the U.S. unlawfully and lived there without lawful admission.
- In Feb. 2014, he received a Notice to Appear charging removability for being present without admission or parole.
- In May 2014, he admitted removable status but sought cancellation of removal.
- In May–Nov. 2014, Iowa state court convictions for theft in the fourth degree and falsifying a driver’s license; one count later vacated on Nov. 21, 2014.
- Two weeks after the government moved to remove him based on these convictions, the Iowa court vacated the theft conviction and modified the remaining sentence; the court’s vacatur order did not state a substantive or procedural reason.
- The IJ pretermitted cancellation of removal, holding the theft conviction remained a crime involving moral turpitude, disqualifying him.]
- The BIA affirmed without opinion; Andrade-Zamora seeks review arguing the vacatur and admission status affect eligibility for cancellation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether vacatur of theft conviction defeats moral-turpitude status. | Vacatur was for immigration reasons; reason not merits-based. | Conviction vacated does not prove merits; still a CIMT. | VACATUR did not prove substantive/procedural basis; court affirmed disqualification. |
| Whether §1229b(b)(1)(C) cross-reference to §1227(a)(2) applies to unlawful entrants. | statute should apply only if admitted; not admitted here. | BIA interpretation preserves cross-reference for all aliens, regardless of admission status. | Court defers to BIA; Chevron deference applies; cross-reference includes CIMT regardless of admission status. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hernandez v. Holder, 783 F.3d 189 (4th Cir. 2015) (Chevron deference; cross-reference interpretation upheld)
- Mancilla-Delafuente v. Lynch, 804 F.3d 1262 (9th Cir. 2015) (Chevron deference for §1229b(b)(1)(C) construction)
- Coyomani-Cielo v. Holder, 758 F.3d 908 (7th Cir. 2014) (Chevron deference; BIA interpretation permissible)
- Nino v. Holder, 690 F.3d 691 (5th Cir. 2012) (statutory cross-reference interpretation)