PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-1213 ANDREW RICHARD SHAW, Petitioner, v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Argued: March 20, 2018 Decided: August 7, 2018 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Petition for review denied by published opinion. Judge Agee wrote an opinion, in which Judge Wilkinson joined. Chief Judge Gregory wrote a dissenting opinion. ARGUED: Lida Duke Angier, DEHGHANI & ASSOCIATES, LLC, New Haven, Connecticut, for Petitioner. Anna Juarez, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. ON BRIEF: Kevin E. Dehghani, Ross W. Hakala, DEHGHANI & ASSOCIATES, LLC, New Haven, Connecticut, for Petitioner. Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant Attorney General, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Senior Litigation Counsel, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. AGEE, Circuit Judge: Petitioner Andrew Richard Shaw, a native and citizen of the United Kingdom and a Lawful Permanent Resident, was convicted under New Jersey law of conspiracy in the third degree and was sentenced to two years’ probation. Later, after returning from a trip abroad, the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) determined that Shaw was inadmissible under Section 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(II) (the “Controlled Substance Provision”) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the “INA”), denied him entry into the United States and began removal proceedings. The Controlled Substance Provision states, “[A]ny alien convicted of, or who admits having committed, or who admits committing acts which constitute the essential elements of . . . a violation of (or a conspiracy or attempt to violate) any law or regulation of a State . . . relating to a controlled substance (as defined in section 802 of Title 21) . . . is inadmissible.” 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(II). An immigration judge (“IJ”) agreed, concluded that Shaw was inadmissible, and ordered him removed under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(A). 1 The Board of Immigration Appeals (the “Board”) dismissed Shaw’s appeal. Shaw now petitions this Court for review. We find no error with the Board’s decision and deny Shaw’s petition for review. 1 As a lawful permanent resident, Shaw’s re-entry into the United States from a trip abroad usually would not be considered “seeking admission into the United States for purposes of the immigration laws[.]” 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(13)(C). In other words, in the ordinary case, lawful permanent residents are not removable under statutes governing aliens seeking admission. Shaw’s case falls within an exception to this general rule. In particular, a lawful permanent resident is regarded as seeking admission if he “has committed an offense identified in section 1182(a)(2)[.]” Id. 2 I. In March 2007, Shaw was charged in New Jersey state court with, among other things, possession of “twenty-five pounds or more” of marijuana with the intent to distribute and conspiracy to commit that crime. A.R. 195. Shaw pleaded guilty to the conspiracy offense and the state court sentenced him to two years’ probation. As relevant to Shaw’s ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals