PAEK, 26 I. & N. Dec. 403

Respondent, a South Korean national, was admitted at a U.S. port of entry in 1991 as a conditional permanent resident under INA §216(a).
He was later convicted (2005–2006) of theft-related offenses including receiving stolen property and robbery, which immigration authorities classified as an aggravated felony.
Removal proceedings were initiated in July 2013; respondent sought adjustment of status based on marriage to a U.S. citizen and a §212(h) waiver of inadmissibility.
The Immigration Judge found respondent removable for crimes involving moral turpitude and as an aggravated felon, and denied the §212(h) waiver on the ground the aggravated-felony bar applied because he had been admitted as a conditional permanent resident.
The respondent appealed solely the denial of relief; the Board analyzed whether admission as a conditional permanent resident counts as being “admitted to the United States as an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence” for purposes of the §212(h) aggravated-felony bar.
The Board concluded that §216 and related regulations treat conditional permanent resident admissions as admissions “as an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence,” making the aggravated-felony bar applicable; appeal dismissed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether admission as a conditional permanent resident under §216(a) qualifies as being “admitted … as an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence” for the §212(h) aggravated‑felony bar	Respondent: §216 conditional admission should not count as admission in the status of a lawful permanent resident for the aggravated‑felony bar (relying on Hanif reasoning for entries without inspection)	Government: §216 explicitly states conditional admissions are admissions “as an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence,” so the §212(h) bar applies	The Board held §216 admissions are admissions “as an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence,” so the aggravated‑felony bar applies and §212(h) waiver is unavailable

Hanif v. Attorney General of United States, 694 F.3d 479 (3d Cir.) (phrase “admitted … as an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence” requires prior admission in LPR status)
Gallimore v. Attorney General of United States, 619 F.3d 216 (3d Cir.) (conditional permanent residents equated with lawful permanent residents for waiver analysis)
Negrete-Ramirez v. Holder, 741 F.3d 1047 (9th Cir.) (aggravated‑felony bar does not apply to those not admitted as LPRs at entry)
Papazoglou v. Holder, 725 F.3d 790 (7th Cir.) (aggravated‑felony bar inapplicable where initial admission was not in LPR status)
Bracamontes v. Holder, 675 F.3d 380 (4th Cir.) (same conclusion for non‑LPR initial admissions)
Lanier v. United States Attorney General, 631 F.3d 1363 (11th Cir.) (aggravated‑felony bar limited to admissions made in LPR status)
Martinez v. Mukasey, 519 F.3d 532 (5th Cir.) (aggravated‑felony bar inapplicable to certain non‑LPR admissions)
Roberts v. Holder, 745 F.3d 928 (8th Cir.) (contrary view: bar applies regardless of how LPR status was acquired)