Graciela Hernandez De Martinez v. Eric Holder, Jr.
770 F.3d 823
9th Cir.2014Background
- Petitioner Graciela Hernandez de Martinez, a Mexican national, entered the U.S. in 1999 without admission.
- In 2011 she pled guilty to criminal impersonation under Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-2006(A)(1) for "assuming a false identity with the intent to defraud."
- She received one year probation for the Class 6 felony conviction.
- Immigration proceedings charged removability for unlawful entry and for commission of a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT).
- The Board of Immigration Appeals held the conviction is categorically a CIMT because the Arizona statute requires intent to defraud, rendering her ineligible for cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(C).
- The Ninth Circuit reviewed the purely legal question whether the conviction categorically involves moral turpitude and affirmed the BIA.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether conviction under A.R.S. § 13-2006(A)(1) is categorically a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT) | Hernandez de Martinez: conviction was for using a false SSN to obtain employment only, not a CIMT | Government: statute requires intent to defraud, and crimes requiring intent to defraud are CIMTs | Conviction is categorically a CIMT because the statute explicitly requires intent to defraud |
Key Cases Cited
- Marmolejo-Campos v. Holder, 558 F.3d 903 (9th Cir. 2009) (courts retain jurisdiction to review purely legal questions about CIMT despite § 1252(a)(2)(C) limits)
- Planes v. Holder, 652 F.3d 991 (9th Cir. 2011) (crimes requiring proof of intent to defraud necessarily involve moral turpitude)
- Blanco v. Mukasey, 518 F.3d 714 (9th Cir. 2008) (intent-to-defraud offenses constitute moral turpitude)