Moises Ramirez-Contreras v. Jefferson Sessions, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 10193

Petitioner Moises Ramirez-Contreras, a Mexican national, pleaded guilty in California to fleeing/evading a police officer in willful or wanton disregard for safety, under Cal. Veh. Code § 2800.2.
He conceded removability and applied for cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b), arguing his § 2800.2 conviction is not a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT).
The IJ and the BIA found § 2800.2 categorically a CIMT, relying in part on BIA precedent interpreting a Washington eluding statute. Ramirez petitioned for review in the Ninth Circuit.
§ 2800.2(a) requires pursuit, willful flight, and willful/wanton disregard for safety; § 2800.2(b) defines ‘‘willful or wanton disregard’’ to include fleeing while committing three or more traffic-point violations under Cal. Veh. Code § 12810.
The California Supreme Court (People v. Howard) held § 2800.2(b) broadened the statute to include conduct that may not be particularly dangerous; thus the statute criminalizes a range of conduct, some of which may be non-dangerous.
The Ninth Circuit evaluated the statute under the categorical approach, determined the BIA’s reasoning was unpersuasive (Skidmore deference), and concluded § 2800.2 is not categorically a CIMT.

Issue	Ramirez-Contreras' Argument	Sessions' Argument	Held
Whether conviction under Cal. Veh. Code § 2800.2 is categorically a crime involving moral turpitude	§ 2800.2 criminalizes willful/wanton flight that shows intent to harm; therefore it is a CIMT	The statute criminalizes reckless, dangerous flight and thus qualifies as a CIMT (relying on BIA and other precedents)	Not categorically a CIMT because § 2800.2(b) allows conviction based on three traffic-point violations that may be non-dangerous; statute is indivisible, so categorical approach controls

Moncrieffe v. Holder, 133 S. Ct. 1678 (2013) (categorical approach; presume conviction rested on least culpable conduct)
Almanza-Arenas v. Lynch, 815 F.3d 469 (9th Cir. 2016) (definition of crime involving moral turpitude: "vile, base, or depraved")
Leal v. Holder, 771 F.3d 1140 (9th Cir. 2014) (reckless conduct creating substantial, imminent risk can be a CIMT)
Ruiz-Lopez v. Holder, 682 F.3d 513 (6th Cir. 2012) (Washington eluding statute held a CIMT when statute penalized dangerous flight)
Mei v. Ashcroft, 393 F.3d 737 (7th Cir. 2004) (high-speed eluding constituted CIMT based on deliberate dangerous conduct)
Vinh Tan Nguyen v. Holder, 763 F.3d 1022 (9th Cir. 2014) (elements review de novo; two-step CIMT analysis)
Rivera v. Lynch, 816 F.3d 1064 (9th Cir. 2016) (deference framework to BIA: Chevron vs. Skidmore)
Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, 467 U.S. 837 (1984) (agencies entitled to deference when reasonable and authorized)
Skidmore v. Swift & Co., 323 U.S. 134 (1944) (agency rulings afforded weight according to persuasiveness)