Rosas-Castaneda v. Holder
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 54
9th Cir.2011Background
- Rosas-Castaneda, a Mexican national and LPR since 1993, was convicted in Arizona of attempted transportation for sale of marijuana >2 pounds.
- The conviction documents showed a single count from a plea agreement; the offense involved solicitation elements under AZ § 13-3405.
- An IJ found Rosas-Castaneda removable for a controlled substance offense but inconclusive whether it qualified as an aggravated felony.
- The IJ requested a transcript of the Arizona plea hearing; Rosas-Castaneda declined to provide further conviction documents.
- Rosas-Castaneda argued that Sandoval-Lua v. Gonzales established that inconclusiveness for aggravated felony determination obligates the government, and that REAL ID Act changes were not applicable.
- The BIA affirmed the IJ, concluding the REAL ID Act altered the burden framework; Rosas-Castaneda’s cancellation claim was denied and he was removed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Sandoval-Lua applies after REAL ID Act | Rosas-Castaneda – burden remains on alien despite REAL ID Act | Government – REAL ID Act changed applicable framework | Sandoval-Lua applies; REAL ID Act did not change the burden. |
| Whether an IJ may require corroboration of conviction documents under 1229a(c)(4)(B) | Rosas-Castaneda – corroboration of conviction records unnecessary | Rosas-Castaneda – IJ may seek corroboration as to record credibility | IJ may not require corroboration of non-testimonial conviction documents; only corroboration of testimony is authorized. |
| Whether the record of conviction is inconclusive as to aggravated felony under the modified categorical approach | Rosas-Castaneda – inconclusive record shows not necessarily an aggravated felony | Government – record supports possible aggravated felony | Record remains inconclusive; accordingly, remand for proper resolution. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sandoval-Lua v. Gonzales, 499 F.3d 1121 (9th Cir. 2007) (established the modified categorical approach allowing inconclusive records to favor the alien)
- Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13 (U.S. 2005) (outlined use of documents to determine conviction elements in the modified categorical approach)
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (U.S. 1990) (foundation for categorical approach in drug offense cases)
- Leyvar-Licea v. INS, 187 F.3d 1147 (9th Cir. 1999) (solicitation offenses can affect aggravated felony categorization)
- United States v. Navidadr-Marcos, 367 F.3d 903 (9th Cir. 2004) (limits judicially noticeable documents in modified categorical analysis)
- Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder, 130 S. Ct. 2577 (U.S. 2010) (clarified element/particular circumstances in aggravated felony analysis)
- Nijhawan v. Holder, - (U.S. 2009) (recognizes expanded steps in determining offense elements vs circumstances)