Juana Negrete-Ramirez v. Eric Holder, Jr.
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 1090
| 9th Cir. | 2014Background
- Negrete-Ramirez, admitted on a B-2 visa in 1996, later adjusted to lawful permanent resident (LPR).
- She was convicted of two counts of lewd acts on a child under California law in 2005.
- DHS charged inadmissibility under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) as a crime involving moral turpitude.
- An IJ found her removable; on remand, she sought a § 212(h) waiver; the IJ initially found her ineligible.
- BIA affirmed the IJ’s ineligibility based on her aggravated felony post-adjustment status.
- Issue presented: whether § 212(h) bars relief for someone who adjusted to LPR after entering the U.S. as a visitor.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is Negrete-Ramirez eligible to seek a § 212(h) waiver despite post-entry adjustment? | Negrete-Ramirez argues the statute allows eligibility when not previously admitted as an LPR at entry. | Government argues § 212(h) precludes relief for those who were LPR at any time prior to or at entry. | Yes; eligible to apply and remand instructed. |
| Does the definition of 'admitted' in § 212(h) incorporate post-entry status adjustments? | Text requires plain reading; post-entry adjustment should be included under 'admitted'. | Admitted is defined by § 1101(a)(13) and excludes post-entry adjustments; agency interpretation should apply. | The text is unambiguous; post-entry adjustment can constitute admission for § 212(h). |
Key Cases Cited
- Papazoglou v. Holder, 725 F.3d 790 (7th Cir. 2013) (supports broadened view of § 212(h) eligibility)
- Leiba v. Holder, 699 F.3d 346 (4th Cir. 2012) (analysis of § 212(h) eligibility thresholds)
- Hanif v. Attorney General, 694 F.3d 479 (3d Cir. 2012) (statutory interpretation of § 212(h) eligibility)
- Martinez v. Attorney General, 693 F.3d 408 (3d Cir. 2012) (statutory construction of admission terms)
- Bracamontes v. Holder, 675 F.3d 380 (4th Cir. 2012) (interpretation of 'admitted' vs. adjustment)
- Lanier v. Attorney General, 631 F.3d 1363 (11th Cir. 2011) (limits of § 212(h) bar to pre-entry LPRs)
- Martinez v. Mukasey, 519 F.3d 532 (5th Cir. 2008) (early interpretation guiding subsequent circuits)
- Sum v. Holder, 602 F.3d 1094 (9th Cir. 2010) (defines 'admitted' as entry by lawful process; post-entry adjustment context)