FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT August 25, 2020 _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court ANAHI JAQUEZ-ESTRADA, Petitioner, v. No. 19-9569 (Petition for Review) WILLIAM P. BARR, United States Attorney General, Respondent. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _________________________________ Before PHILLIPS, BALDOCK, and CARSON, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ Petitioner Anahi Jaquez-Estrada seeks review of a decision of the Bureau of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming a decision of an Immigration Judge which found her removable to Mexico. We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review. * After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. BACKGROUND Petitioner Ahahi Jaquez-Estrada is a native of Mexico who was brought to the United States in 1995 as a young child without admission or inspection. She is married to a U.S. citizen and has a U.S. citizen child. In February 2015, she applied for and received relief under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which deferred any action by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) until February 2017. In June 2016, she requested and received a grant of advance parole to visit her grandfather in Mexico. When she returned, she presented herself at a port of entry and was paroled into the United States until June 16, 2016. Jaquez-Estrada remained past the expiration of her parole and reapplied for deferred action under DACA. She was granted another two-year DACA deferral in February 2017, which would have expired in February 2019. In February 2018, however, she pled guilty to two counts of insurance fraud (one misdemeanor count under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-5-211(1)(a), (4) and one felony count under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-5-211(1)(b), (4)) and received a two-year deferred sentence. DHS then revoked her DACA deferral and, on April 4, 2018, issued a Notice to Appear (NTA) charging that she was inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(I), based on her conviction for a crime of moral turpitude, and under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) based on her having entered the U.S. without proper documentation. Although Jaquez-Estrada had resided in the United States for a significant period of time before the revocation of her DACA status and initiation of removal proceedings, she was classified as an “arriving alien” under 8 C.F.R. 2 § 1.2, part of the implementing regulations for the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA).1 Jaquez-Estrada appeared at a hearing before an immigration judge (IJ) in April 2018 and denied the charges in the NTA. Over the course of the ensuing year, the ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals