Kondjoua v. Barr


16-296 Kondjoua v. Barr UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT ___________________ August Term, 2019 Argued: August 22, 2019 Decided: May 28, 2020 Docket No. 16-296 ___________________ CHRYSOSTOME TSAFACK KONDJOUA, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM P. BARR, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ___________________ Before: HALL, LIVINGSTON, Circuit Judges, and RESTANI, 1 Judge. Petitioner Chrysostome Tsafack Kondjoua, a native and citizen of Cameroon, seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming a decision of an Immigration Judge finding that Kondjoua’s conviction for sexual assault in the third degree in violation of Connecticut General Statutes § 53a-72a(a)(1) is an aggravated felony crime of violence as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1Judge Jane A. Restani, of the United States Court of International Trade, sitting by designation. 1 § 16(b) and ordering him removed from the United States on that ground. Subsequently, in Sessions v. Dimaya, 138 S. Ct. 1204 (2018), the Supreme Court held that 18 U.S.C. § 16(b), as incorporated into the Immigration and Nationality Act, was void for vagueness. We decline to remand for the agency to consider in the first instance whether Kondjoua’s conviction of Connecticut third-degree sexual assault is a crime of violence under the alternative definition in 18 U.S.C. § 16(a), but rather consider that legal question de novo and hold that it categorically satisfies that definition. Petition DENIED. ___________________ TADHG DOOLEY, Wiggin and Dana LLP (Jessica Garland, Yena Lee, Law Students, Appellate Litigation Project, Yale Law School, on the brief, Benjamin M. Daniels, Wiggin and Dana LLP, on the brief), New Haven, Connecticut, for Petitioner. JESSICA A. DAWGERT, Senior Litigation Counsel, Office of Immigration Litigation (Joseph H. Hunt, Assistant Attorney General, Erica B. Miles, Senior Litigation Counsel, on the brief), United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. ___________________ PER CURIAM: Petitioner Chrysostome Tsafack Kondjoua seeks review of a January 12, 2016 decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming a September 14, 2015 decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) ordering him removed to his native Cameroon because his conviction for sexual assault in the third degree in violation of Connecticut General Statutes (“CGS”) § 53a-72a(a)(1) was an 2 aggravated felony crime of violence as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 16(b). Subsequently, in Sessions v. Dimaya, 138 S. Ct. 1204 (2018), the Supreme Court held that the definition of crime of violence in § 16(b) as incorporated into the Immigration and Nationality Act was unconstitutionally void for vagueness. We decline to remand for the BIA to determine whether Kondjoua’s conviction for Connecticut third- degree sexual assault constitutes an aggravated felony crime of violence under the alternative definition in 18 U.S.C. § 16(a) because that issue is a question of law that we decide de novo and the interpretation of a state criminal statute is not within the BIA’s area of expertise. We further hold that Kondjoua’s statute of conviction, CGS § 53a-72a(a)(1), which requires use of a dangerous instrument, actual physical force or violence, or superior physical strength, necessarily includes the use ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals