Hernan Hernandez-Zavala v. Loretta Lynch
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 20160
| 4th Cir. | 2015Background
- Hernandez-Zavala, a Mexican national, pleaded guilty in North Carolina to misdemeanor assault with a deadly weapon under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-33(c)(1); the victim was his cohabiting partner and mother of his child.
- DHS charged him as removable and he applied for cancellation of removal under INA § 240A(b); DHS moved to pretermit his application asserting he was deportable under INA § 237(a)(2)(E)(i) as having committed a "crime of domestic violence."
- The statute defines "crime of domestic violence" by incorporating the federal definition of "crime of violence" (18 U.S.C. § 16) and adding that the offense must be "committed by" someone in a covered domestic relationship with the victim.
- The IJ found the state conviction was categorically a crime of violence and, using both a modified categorical and circumstance-specific inquiry, concluded the domestic-relationship requirement was met; the BIA affirmed using the circumstance-specific approach.
- Hernandez-Zavala petitioned for review, arguing the categorical approach should apply and that his state statute (which has no domestic-relationship element) therefore cannot qualify as a "crime of domestic violence."
Issues
| Issue | Hernandez-Zavala's Argument | DHS's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the INA's "crime of domestic violence" requires that the underlying state offense include the domestic-relationship as an element (categorical approach) or permits inquiry into the specific circumstances of the conviction (circumstance-specific approach) | The domestic-relationship must be an element of the predicate offense; apply the categorical approach only to statutory elements | The domestic-relationship is an attendant fact; courts may examine the record of conviction to determine if the relationship existed | The circumstance-specific approach applies; the court may consider underlying conviction evidence to determine the domestic-relationship, so the conviction qualifies as a crime of domestic violence and bars cancellation of removal |
Key Cases Cited
- Moncrieffe v. Holder, 133 S. Ct. 1678 (2013) (describes the categorical approach and limits on inquiry into facts of prior convictions)
- Nijhawan v. Holder, 557 U.S. 29 (2009) (approves circumstance-specific inquiry when statutory text references factual qualifiers not encompassed by a generic offense)
- United States v. Hayes, 555 U.S. 415 (2009) (interprets nearly identical domestic-relationship language in a firearm-disability statute and permits fact-based inquiry into relationship)
- Mellouli v. Lynch, 135 S. Ct. 1980 (2015) (reinforces that immigration consequences are tied to convictions, not conduct, in the categorical approach framework)
- Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13 (2005) (limits what documents may be consulted when applying the categorical approach)
- Descamps v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2276 (2013) (explains divisible statutes and the modified categorical approach)
- Bianco v. Holder, 624 F.3d 265 (5th Cir. 2010) (holds domestic-relationship need not be an element and approves circumstance-specific inquiry)
- Prudencio v. Holder, 669 F.3d 472 (4th Cir. 2012) (cautions against unrestricted circumstance-specific inquiry but recognizes narrow exceptions)