22-6243 Giron-Molina v. Garland United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit August Term 2022 Submitted: April 21, 2023 Decided: June 20, 2023 No. 22-6243 MARIA MONSERRAT GIRON-MOLINA, Petitioner, v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, United States Attorney General Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Before: WALKER, PARKER, and BIANCO, Circuit Judges. Petitioner Maria Monserrat Giron-Molina seeks review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing her appeal, ordering her removed, and denying her application for cancellation of removal. The BIA ordered that she be removed under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) for having been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude (“CIMT”). See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C)–(D). Specifically, the BIA and Immigration Judge (“IJ”) determined that a conviction under Arkansas Code Annotated (“ACA”) § 5-60-101 is categorically a CIMT. We REVERSE. We conclude that a conviction under ACA § 5- 60-101 is not categorically a CIMT because the statute criminalizes conduct that is not “inherently base, vile, or depraved.” Mota v. Barr, 971 F.3d 96, 99 (2d Cir. 2020). Lara Nochomovitz, Chagrin Falls, OH, for Petitioner. Brian Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General; Anthony P. Nicastro, Assistant Director; Kristen H. Blosser, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. 2 PER CURIAM: Petitioner Maria Monserrat Giron-Molina, a native and citizen of Mexico, seeks review of an April 20, 2022, decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming an August 30, 2021, decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) ordering her removed and denying her application for cancellation of removal after determining she had been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude (“CIMT”). In re Maria Monserrat Giron-Molina, No. A207 175 824 (B.I.A. Apr. 20, 2022), aff’g No. A207 175 824 (Immig. Ct. Buffalo Aug. 30, 2021). That conviction, for abuse of a corpse in violation of Arkansas Code Annotated (“ACA”) § 5-60-101, stemmed from Giron-Molina’s concealing her child’s body in a closet after he was murdered by Tyler Hobbs. In her petition for review, Giron-Molina argues that the BIA and IJ erred because her conviction under ACA § 5-60-101 is not categorically a CIMT. Applying the modified categorical approach to the Arkansas statute, we agree and we therefore REVERSE the decision of the BIA and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. DISCUSSION When “the BIA adopts and affirms the IJ’s decision, we review the two decisions in tandem.” Ojo v. Garland, 25 F.4th 152, 159 (2d Cir. 2022) (alteration marks omitted). Our jurisdiction is limited to constitutional claims and questions of law given that Giron-Molina was ordered removed under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) for having been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude (“CIMT”). See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C)–(D). We review de novo an agency’s determination that a crime falls within the definition of a CIMT. See Mota v. Barr, 971 F.3d 96, 99 (2d Cir. 2020); Gill v. INS, 420 F.3d 82, 89 3 (2d Cir. 2005). The dispositive issue …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals