Soto-Hernandez v. Holder, Jr.
729 F.3d 1
1st Cir.2013Background
- Soto-Hernandez, Dominican citizen, permanent resident since 1996, faced removal proceedings for a crime of domestic violence committed in 2003.
- In 2005 Soto was convicted for unlawfully delivering a pistol in Rhode Island, violating state purchase and delivery statutes; sentenced to two concurrent suspended three-year terms.
- The IJ held Soto’s firearm conviction satisfied the aggravated felony definition under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(C) as illicit trafficking in firearms, pretermitting cancellation of removal.
- The BIA affirmed, relying on Davis’s definition of trafficking as a commerce/merchant activity and extending it to include a single sale.
- Soto appealed, arguing the conduct did not rise to “trafficking” because he was not a dealer or merchant; this appeal raises issues of statutory interpretation and deference to the BIA.
- The court analyzed Chevron deference, agency interpretation, and arguments about plurality versus singular references, ultimately denying the petition for review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trafficking in firearms includes a single sale | Soto argues a one-time sale is not trafficking. | Soto's sale fits the BIA's interpretation of trafficking as a broad commercial exchange. | Yes; BIA's interpretation reasonable and consistent with statute. |
| Whether the plural reference to firearms in § 1101(a)(43)(C) limits application to multiple transfers | Plural use precludes applying to a single firearm sale. | Plural does not render the interpretation impermissible; singular sale can fall within the scope. | No; singular sale may fall within the scope. |
| Whether the rule of lenity applies to immigration statutes in this context | Lenity should favor the alien by narrowing ambiguous terms. | Lenity does not apply or does not require narrowing the BIA's reasonable interpretation here. | Not controlling; lenity does not override the reasonable interpretation. |
Key Cases Cited
- Matter of Davis, 20 I. & N. Dec. 536 (BIA 1992) (defined trafficking in controlled substances and used as precedent for firearms trafficking interpretation)
- Lopez v. Gonzales, 549 U.S. 47 (U.S. 2006) (trafficking ordinarily connotes commercial dealing)
- Urena-Ramirez v. Ashcroft, 341 F.3d 51 (1st Cir. 2003) (courts define illicit trafficking as illegally trading or dealing in goods)
- Matter of Roberts, 20 I. & N. Dec. 294 (BIA 1991) (one conviction for sale of narcotics can qualify as trafficking)
- Matter of P-, 5 I. & N. Dec. 190 (BIA 1953) ("first and only" sale of drugs can qualify as trafficking)