Lecky v. Holder
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 13805
| 1st Cir. | 2013Background
- Lecky is a citizen and native of Jamaica and was a lawful permanent resident since 1996.
- In 2006, Connecticut charged Lecky with robbery/criminal assault; the charge was later amended to second-degree larceny under § 53a-123(a)(3), to which Lecky pled guilty under Alford doctrine in 2006 as an adult.
- Lecky was 17 at the time of the offense and was sentenced to two years and a day with five years of special parole.
- DHS initiated removal proceedings in February 2012 alleging Lecky was removable for an aggravated felony based on the theft offense and later added a second charge for a crime of violence.
- An IJ sustained both charges; Lecky sought cancellation of removal, while the government argued the second charge warranted removal.
- BIA affirmed removal on both the theft offense aggravated felony and crime of violence grounds; Lecky petitioned for review challenging the classification of the offense and his juvenile status for immigration purposes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Connecticut second-degree larceny is a theft offense aggravated felony | Lecky contends the statute is not a theft offense under § 1101(a)(43)(G). | The government contends the statute fits the BIA's theft offense definition and is divisible, satisfying the aggravated felony category. | Connecticut second-degree larceny is a theft offense aggravated felony. |
| Whether Lecky's status at conviction as an adult was valid for immigration purposes | Vieira García abstains from treating a juvenile as an adult for immigration purposes. | State adjudication determines adult vs juvenile status; this court must follow precedent binding on it. | Lecky's adult conviction status is upheld based on controlling circuit precedent. |
Key Cases Cited
- Abimbola v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 173 (2d Cir. 2004) (Connecticut larceny offenses qualify as theft offenses under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(G))
- Almeida v. Holder, 588 F.3d 778 (2d Cir. 2009) (second-degree larceny under Connecticut law qualifies as theft offense)
- Conteh v. Gonzales, 461 F.3d 45 (1st Cir. 2006) (modified categorical approach for state offenses)
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (U.S. 1990) (categorical approach to determine violent felonies)
- Matter of V-Z-S-, 22 I. & N. Dec. 1338 (BIA 2000) (definition of theft offense under BIA interpretation)
- Vieira García v. I.N.S., 239 F.3d 409 (1st Cir. 2001) (no jurisdiction to recharacterize state juvenile/adult adjudication for immigration purposes)
- United States v. De Jesus, 984 F.2d 21 (1st Cir. 1993) (larceny from the person as crime of violence analogue)