You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Leopoldo Luna v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

Citations: 53 F.3d 338; 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 22774; 1995 WL 268436Docket: 94-70265

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; May 5, 1995; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this immigration case, the petitioner, a lawful permanent resident convicted of two robberies in California, petitioned the Ninth Circuit for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) order affirming his deportability under 8 U.S.C. § 1251(a)(4) for committing two crimes of moral turpitude. The petitioner challenged the BIA's conclusion that his crimes did not arise from a single scheme, the admission of his probation report as evidence, and the denial of his waiver under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c). The Ninth Circuit, exercising jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a), denied the petition, finding the agency's determination substantially reasonable. The court held that the probation report was properly admitted, as it was certified and its probative value was significant, while the petitioner's right to cross-examine was not violated given the uncontested nature of the report's contents. Furthermore, the court upheld the denial of the waiver, noting that the Immigration Judge's decision was supported by substantial evidence and a reasoned assessment of the petitioner's criminal history and personal circumstances. The panel concluded that the negative factors in the petitioner's case outweighed the positive, leading to the affirmation of the BIA's order.

Legal Issues Addressed

Admission of Evidence in Deportation Proceedings

Application: The BIA admitted Luna's probation report despite his objections of hearsay and unauthentication, as the report was certified and deemed reliable, and its probative value was upheld.

Reasoning: Due process mandates that government documents used in deportation proceedings must be authenticated, as established in Iran v. INS.

Deportation for Crimes of Moral Turpitude under 8 U.S.C. § 1251(a)(4)

Application: The court upheld the BIA's determination that Luna's separate criminal acts constituted distinct crimes of moral turpitude, thereby affirming his deportability.

Reasoning: Luna, a lawful permanent resident since 1973, was convicted of two robberies in California in December 1985. He was charged with deportation in August 1989 for having committed two moral turpitude crimes not arising from a single scheme.

Right to Cross-Examine Government Witnesses

Application: Luna's right to cross-examine was not violated as he did not contest the facts in the probation report, which he admitted were accurate due to his lack of recollection.

Reasoning: Aliens have the right to cross-examine government witnesses, but this does not extend to uncontested facts.

Waiver Under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c)

Application: The denial of Luna's waiver request was upheld as the IJ's decision was based on a comprehensive assessment of positive and negative factors and was supported by substantial evidence.

Reasoning: A denial of 212(c) relief can be overturned only if the BIA lacks a reasoned explanation based on legitimate concerns.