FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT July 15, 2019 _________________________________ Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court ARTURO CERROS-GUTIERREZ, a/k/a Arturo Cerros, Petitioner, v. No. 18-9555 (Petition for Review) WILLIAM P. BARR, United States Attorney General, Respondent. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _________________________________ Before LUCERO, MATHESON, and MORITZ, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ Arturo Cerros-Gutierrez, a native and citizen of Mexico, seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) determination that he is removable because he committed an aggravated felony. See 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii). Exercising jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1), (2)(D), we deny 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 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel.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. I. BACKGROUND The United States admitted Mr. Cerros-Gutierrez as a lawful permanent resident in 1988. Ten years later, he pled guilty to residential burglary under Ark. Code Ann. § 5-39-201(a)(1) (1997). An Arkansas court sentenced him to five years in prison.1 In 2005, Mr. Cerros-Gutierrez pled guilty to battery upon a peace officer under N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-22-24. The Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) commenced removal proceedings in 2017, alleging that these convictions support removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(ii), (iii).2 Those sections provide that if an alien commits two or more crimes involving moral turpitude, or commits an aggravated felony, the alien is deportable. Mr. Cerros-Gutierrez sought termination of the removal proceedings, arguing that his prior crimes (1) did not involve the moral turpitude required by § 1227(a)(2)(A)(ii), and (2) were not aggravated felonies within the meaning of § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii). The immigration judge (IJ) initially ruled in favor of Mr. Cerros-Gutierrez. But the IJ reconsidered his initial ruling and ordered removal based solely on his conclusion that Mr. Cerros-Gutierrez’s Arkansas burglary was an aggravated felony 1 The Arkansas court suspended imposition of the sentence for two years. 2 The initial notice to appear sought removal under only § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii) due to the Arkansas burglary conviction. DHS later added charges that sought removal under (1) § 1227(a)(2)(A)(ii) because Cerros-Gutierrez had allegedly been convicted of two crimes involving moral turpitude, and (2) § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii) due to the New Mexico battery conviction. 2 under § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii). Mr. Cerros-Gutierrez appealed this decision to the BIA, which dismissed the appeal. II. DISCUSSION A. Legal Background We review de novo the BIA’s legal determination that Mr. Cerros-Gutierrez’s burglary conviction qualifies as an aggravated felony. See Herrera-Castillo v. Holder, 573 F.3d 1004, 1007 (10th Cir. 2009). “The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 66 Stat. 163, 8 U.S.C. § 1101 et seq., provides that ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals