Emmanuel Mahn v. United States Attorney General
767 F.3d 170
| 3rd Cir. | 2014Background
- Mahn is a Liberian citizen who entered as a refugee in 2000 and became a lawful permanent resident about five years later.
- In 2007, Mahn pled guilty to theft by deception and forgery in Pennsylvania.
- In 2008, Mahn pled guilty to reckless endangering another person under 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2705 after a driving incident harming a house's garage and laundry area; no injuries occurred.
- In 2011, DHS issued a Notice to Appear charging removability for two CIMTs plus a separate reckless endangerment conviction not arising from a single scheme.
- The IJ and BIA relied on Knapik to categorize Mahn’s reckless endangerment as a CIMT, rendering Mahn removable.
- Mahn petitioned for review, arguing the 2705 conviction is not a CIMT; the court agrees and vacates the removal order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether PA recklessly endangering another person is a CIMT | Mahn | Mahn | Not a CIMT |
| Appropriate standard of review and deference for unpublished BIA decisions | Mahn | BIA’s reasoning allowed Chevron deference in precedent cases | Chevron deference not applied; unpublished, single-member BIA decisions lack weight |
Key Cases Cited
- Knapik v. Ashcroft, 384 F.3d 84 (3d Cir. 2004) (reckless endangerment in NY statute can be CIMT; distinctions from PA statute)
- Descamps v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2276 (U.S. 2013) (categorical approach to CIMT analysis)
- Jean-Louis v. Att’y Gen., 582 F.3d 462 (3d Cir. 2009) (least culpable conduct under statute for CIMT analysis)
- Partyka v. Att’y Gen., 417 F.3d 411 (3d Cir. 2005) (reprehensibility and deliberation in moral turpitude inquiry)
- Totimeh v. Att’y Gen., 666 F.3d 109 (3d Cir. 2012) (nature of act determines CIMT, not merely prohibition)
- Mehboob v. Att’y Gen., 549 F.3d 272 (3d Cir. 2008) (deference standards for BIA determinations in CIMT context)