Nunez-Reyes v. Holder
646 F.3d 684
| 9th Cir. | 2011Background
- Nunez-Reyes, a Mexican national, entered the U.S. in 1992 and later faced removal proceedings.
- California expunged his 2001 convictions (felony possession and misdemeanor being under the influence) under §1210.1(e)(1) after rehabilitation, effectively deeming them never to have occurred.
- The expungement was later argued to exempt these convictions from immigration consequences under the FFOA and 8 U.S.C. §1101(a)(48)(A).
- IJ and BIA denied relief, holding expunged state convictions could preclude relief or not be eligible for FFOA treatment.
- A three-judge panel granted relief based on Lujan-Armendariz's equal-protection rationale; en banc overruled that rule and applied a prospective-only approach.
- Petition denied on the merits after applying the new rule prospectively, with substantial discussion of Chevron Oil/Harper frameworks.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does expunged state simple-possession count as a conviction? | Nunez-Reyes argues expunged state possession convictions are not convictions for immigration purposes. | Holders argues expunged state convictions may be counted and Lujan-Armendariz misapplied. | No; the rule overruling Lujan-Armendariz applies prospectively only. |
| Should Lujan-Armendariz be overruled on equal-protection grounds? | Nunez-Reyes relies on equal protection to treat expunged state and federal convictions the same. | The majority upholds overruling on equal-protection grounds given rational-basis review. | Yes, overruling Lujan-Armendariz as to state expungements is adopted. |
| Should the new rule be applied retroactively or prospectively? | Retroactive application would align with Harper’s general rule. | Chevron Oil factors permit selective prospectivity. | Applied prospectively; not retroactive. |
| Does Chevron Oil support nonretroactive application here? | Chevron Oil factors point toward retroactivity to correct past reliance. | Second factor indicates prospective application better fits history and purpose. | Chevron Oil factors do not clearly favor nonretroactivity; overall retroactivity preferred, but here prospectivity applied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lujan-Armendariz v. INS, 222 F.3d 728 (9th Cir. 2000) (equal protection limits on treating expunged state convictions as convictions for immigration)
- Rice v. Holder, 597 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 2010) (FFOA treatment extended to being under the influence where lesser than simple possession)
- Ramirez-Altamirano v. Holder, 563 F.3d 800 (9th Cir. 2009) (FFOA treatment discussion for expunged offenses)
- Dillingham v. INS, 267 F.3d 996 (9th Cir. 2001) (precedent on expunged state convictions and FFOA)
- Cardenas-Uriarte v. INS, 227 F.3d 1132 (9th Cir. 2000) (LLowest offense concept under FFOA)