Gaspar Esparza Rodriguez v. Eric Holder, Jr., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 21735

Rodriguez is a Mexican citizen admitted as a lawful permanent resident in 1995.
In 2001 he was convicted of two Texas misdemeanors: burglary of a vehicle (§30.04(a)) and assault (§22.01), receiving 60 days’ jail for each.
He returned to Mexico after serving and later sought admission to the U.S. as a permanent resident in 2010.
The DHS charged him as inadmissible under § 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) for a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT) based on his assault conviction.
An IJ ruled that the assault was a CIMT, denied cancellation of removal, and ordered his removal; the BIA denied his appeal, and Rodriguez appealed to the Fifth Circuit.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Texas § 22.01(a)(1) assault is a CIMT	Rodriguez argues the record does not establish CIMT under the statute.	Government contends the conviction falls within CIMT after the modified categorical approach.	Yes; § 22.01(a)(1) can be a CIMT under the modified categorical approach.

Rodriguez-Castro v. Gonzales, 427 F.3d 316 (5th Cir. 2005) (delegated interpretation of CIMT and Chevron deference framework)
In re Solon, 24 I. & N. Dec. 239 (BIA 2007) (assault statutes with offensive or provocative contact not categorically CIMT)
Bianco v. Holder, 624 F.3d 265 (5th Cir. 2010) (record-of-conviction definition under modified categorical approach)
Aldape-Garcia v. Holder, 472 F. App’x 304 (5th Cir. 2012) (unpublished disposition on § 22.01 CIMT precedents)
Calderon-Dominguez v. Mukasey, 261 F. App’x 671 (5th Cir. 2008) (application of modified categorical approach to CIMT analysis)
Mustafaj v. Holder, 369 F. App’x 163 (2d Cir. 2010) (reasonableness of BIA’s CIMT construction under Chevron)
Smalley v. Ashcroft, 354 F.3d 332 (5th Cir. 2003) (de novo review of CIMT determinations by BIA)
Nguyen v. Reno, 211 F.3d 692 (1st Cir. 2000) (assault requires aggravating factors for CIMT designation)