25 I. & N. Dec. 417
BIA2011Background
- Respondent Samuel Esaul Guevara Alfaro, a Salvadoran native, became a lawful permanent resident in 1997.
- He was convicted in California on March 11, 2005, for using a minor to violate a controlled substances law and for unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor (statutory rape) under age 16.
- Around January 23, 2002, he also was convicted of petty theft in California.
- DHS charged removability under multiple provisions, including two aggravated felonies and a minor-sex offense; a 2009 IJ decision found no removal based on drug trafficking but sustained removal based on sexual offense.
- The Board reversed, remanded, and then remanded again; at Daniels’ 2009–2010 proceedings, DHS sought to rely on three-step Silva-Trevino framework to assess moral turpitude, while respondent argued Quintero-Salazar controlled.
- The panel held Silva-Trevino controls absent other authority, and remanded for findings on respondent’s knowledge of the victim’s age under the Silva-Trevino framework.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Silva-Trevino governs moral turpitude over Quintero-Salazar | Guevara Alfaro argues Quintero-Salazar governs moral turpitude. | DHS argues Silva-Trevino controls and supersedes Quintero-Salazar. | Silva-Trevino controls; it binds absent other authority. |
| Whether Silva-Trevino's procedural framework applies to this case | Ninth Circuit framework should be followed per Marmolejo-Campos and related authority. | Court must apply Silva-Trevino’s three-step framework absent controlling authority. | Three-step framework applies; must be applied de novo guidance. |
| Whether 261.5(d) is a categorical crime involving moral turpitude | Under Silva-Trevino, statute may be categorically turpitudinous for minor victim cases. | Under Quintero-Salazar, statutory rape may not be categorically a CIMT. | Not categorically a CIMT under the first step; proceed to steps two and three. |
| Whether the record shows respondent knew the victim was under 16 | Evidence could show knowledge; record insufficient for first two steps. | Record lacks documents showing knowledge; remand needed. | Remand to allow IJ to determine knowledge under the Silva-Trevino framework. |
| Remedy and further proceedings if CIMT status is established | If CIMT, respondent may seek relief from removal; record remand necessary. | Proceedings should be reinstated with remand for proper fact-finding. | DHS appeal sustained; record remanded for further Silva-Trevino proceedings |
Key Cases Cited
- Matter of Silva-Trevino, 24 I. & N. Dec. 687 (A.G. 2008) (establishes three-step framework for CIMT analysis)
- Quintero-Salazar v. Keisler, 506 F.3d 688 (9th Cir. 2007) (holds statutory rape not categorically a CIMT)
- Marmolejo-Campos v. Holder, 558 F.3d 903 (9th Cir. 2009) (acknowledges Silva-Trevino framework; deference to AG interpretation)
- Saavedra-Figueroa v. Holder, 625 F.3d 621 (9th Cir. 2010) (assesses Silva-Trevino framework; confirms CIMT analysis under framework)
- Brand X Internet Servs. v. Nat’l Cable & Telecomm. Ass’n, 545 U.S. 967 (2005) (deference to agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes)
- Mata-Guerrero v. Holder, 627 F.3d 256 (7th Cir. 2010) (Seventh Circuit defers to Silva-Trevino methodology)