783 F.3d 1226
11th Cir.2015Background
- Drew Walker, a Jamaican national admitted as a lawful permanent resident in 1990, pleaded no contest in 2001 to three counts of uttering a forged instrument under Fla. Stat. § 831.02; one count involved more than $10,000.
- In 2010 DHS initiated removal proceedings alleging (1) aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(M)(i) (fraud/deceit with loss > $10,000) and (2) two or more crimes involving moral turpitude under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(ii).
- Walker admitted the convictions but argued they did not categorically constitute deceit/fraud or moral turpitude because the statute criminalizes intent to injure as well as intent to defraud.
- The immigration judge and the Board of Immigration Appeals found Walker removable on both grounds; Walker petitioned the Eleventh Circuit.
- The Eleventh Circuit reviewed legal questions de novo and applied the categorical approach to determine whether the Florida offense necessarily involves deceit and whether it constitutes moral turpitude.
Issues
| Issue | Walker's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Fla. Stat. § 831.02 is categorically an "aggravated felony" (fraud or deceit with loss > $10,000) | § 831.02 allows conviction based on intent to injure, so it need not involve deceit | The statute requires uttering/publishing as true a known false writing, which necessarily involves deceit | The offense necessarily involves deceit and thus qualifies as an aggravated felony under § 1101(a)(43)(M)(i) |
| Whether § 831.02 is categorically a crime involving moral turpitude | Because conviction can be based on intent to injure, it might not involve dishonesty or deceit | Uttering a forged instrument is dishonest conduct and therefore involves moral turpitude | The offense involves deceit/dishonesty and is a crime of moral turpitude under § 1227(a)(2)(A)(ii) |
Key Cases Cited
- Donawa v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 735 F.3d 1275 (11th Cir. 2013) (applies the categorical approach to determine whether a state offense matches a federal immigration definition)
- Fajardo v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 659 F.3d 1303 (11th Cir. 2011) (uses the categorical approach to assess whether an offense involves moral turpitude)
- Itani v. Ashcroft, 298 F.3d 1213 (11th Cir. 2002) (defines crime of moral turpitude as acts of baseness, vileness, or depravity; dishonesty generally qualifies)