Narrative Opinion Summary
The case involves a lawful permanent resident, Becker, who petitioned for review of a removal order issued by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), following a conviction for possession of drug paraphernalia. Becker, who entered the U.S. as a child, sought cancellation of removal under INA 240A(a) despite a 1978 conviction for possession of marijuana for sale, classified as an aggravated felony. The Immigration Judge (IJ) upheld his removability, a decision affirmed by the BIA. Becker argued that the Ninth Circuit's decision in Lopez-Castellanos should influence his eligibility, but the court maintained that aggravated felony convictions preclude cancellation of removal. The court also addressed Becker's argument for a 212(c) waiver, clarifying that while such a waiver removes the deportability finding, it does not negate the conviction's immigration consequences. The court found that Becker's aggravated felony conviction, combined with his extensive criminal history, rendered him ineligible for relief. Consequently, Becker's petition for review was denied, reaffirming the legal standard that aggravated felony convictions bar eligibility for cancellation of removal, without violating rights to discretionary relief. Other issues raised by Becker were reserved for a separate memorandum.
Legal Issues Addressed
212(c) Waiver and its Limitationssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court clarified that a 212(c) waiver removes the finding of deportability but does not eliminate the immigration consequences of the underlying conviction, impacting Becker's eligibility for cancellation of removal.
Reasoning: The waiver provided by section 212(c) only removes the finding of deportability, not the underlying grounds for it, meaning Becker's criminal record remains relevant for immigration purposes.
Aggravated Felony under Immigration Lawsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Becker's 1978 conviction for possession of marijuana for sale is classified as an aggravated felony, thus preventing eligibility for cancellation of removal.
Reasoning: Becker's appeal regarding his eligibility for cancellation of removal under immigration law is denied. His 1978 conviction is classified as an aggravated felony, which disqualifies him from cancellation of removal, despite his arguments for a 212(c) waiver concerning both his 1978 and 2004 convictions.
Cancellation of Removal under INA 240A(a)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court denied Becker's request for cancellation of removal due to his aggravated felony conviction, which disqualifies him from relief under INA 240A(a).
Reasoning: Therefore, Becker's petition for review was denied, affirming his removal based on the established legal standards regarding aggravated felonies.
St. Cyr's Retroactivity Analysissubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The case distinguishes Becker's situation from Lopez-Castellanos, who was eligible for cancellation of removal due to the retroactivity analysis established in St. Cyr.
Reasoning: In Lopez-Castellanos, the application of St. Cyr's retroactivity analysis determined that a petitioner, charged with removability in December 1999 due to a 1988 guilty plea for lewd acts with a child, remained eligible for cancellation of removal.