Gomez Heredia v. Sessions, 865 F.3d 60

Gomez, a Dominican national, became an LPR in August 1997 and was convicted (1999) of NY marijuana possession (NYPL §221.10) and (2010) of cocaine possession with intent to sell (an aggravated felony at the time).
In June 2015 Gomez took a short trip to the Dominican Republic; on reentry he was treated as an LPR "seeking admission" because of his drug convictions and was charged inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. §1182(a)(2).
An IJ ordered Gomez removed in January 2016; the BIA affirmed in May 2016, rejecting Gomez’s claim that IIRIRA revived the Fleuti doctrine and thus that his brief trip should not trigger readmission procedures.
After the BIA decision, a New York court vacated Gomez’s 2010 aggravated-felony conviction and he pled to a lesser drug offense; Gomez moved to reopen and applied for cancellation of removal, asserting he met the 5- and 7-year residency thresholds.
The BIA denied reopening (Sept. 2016), concluding Gomez’s 1999 marijuana offense triggered the stop-time rule and thus he did not accrue the required seven years of continuous residence.
Gomez appealed two consolidated petitions: (1) challenging the BIA’s ruling that IIRIRA overruled Fleuti and (2) challenging denial of the motion to reopen based on the stop-time rule. The Second Circuit denied review.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether IIRIRA overruled the Fleuti doctrine so short trips by LPRs can trigger readmission when a drug conviction exists	Gomez: Fleuti still protects brief, innocent trips; he should not be treated as "seeking admission" on reentry	Gov: IIRIRA amended INA to remove Fleuti protection for LPRs with §1182(a)(2) offenses	Court: IIRIRA overruled Fleuti; BIA reasonably concluded Gomez was seeking admission on reentry
Whether the stop-time rule prevents Gomez from accruing 7 years of continuous residence where the predicate offense was committed in 1999 but inadmissibility was asserted in 2015	Gomez: Time should stop only when he was rendered inadmissible (2015 on reentry), so he accrued 7+ years	Gov: Stop-time is triggered by commission of qualifying offense (1999) once it renders the alien inadmissible; accrual stops as of commission date	Court: Stop-time is measured from date the offense was committed; BIA properly denied reopening for lack of prima facie eligibility

Fleuti v. Rosenberg, 374 U.S. 449 (1963) (established that brief, innocent departures by LPRs did not subject them to exclusion proceedings)
Vartelas v. Holder, 620 F.3d 108 (2d Cir. 2010) (held IIRIRA eliminated Fleuti protections for certain LPR departures)
Centurion v. Sessions, 860 F.3d 69 (2d Cir. 2017) (affirmed that IIRIRA ended Fleuti; LPRs with drug offenses must seek formal admission)
Baraket v. Holder, 632 F.3d 56 (2d Cir. 2011) (stop-time rule is triggered by commission of the predicate offense)
Martinez v. INS, 523 F.3d 365 (2d Cir. 2008) (interpreting timing for stop-time rule; commission date controls)
Calix v. Lynch, 784 F.3d 1000 (5th Cir. 2015) (agreement that commission date ends accrual even if admission not sought until later)
Reyes v. Holder, 714 F.3d 731 (2d Cir. 2013) (distinguishes special statutory/regulatory schemes and cautions against overextending those holdings)