The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals denied an individual’s request for removal cancellation. The Court explained the applicant’s criminal record disqualified them from a waiver of removal. The Court rejected each of these arguments in turn. The statute clearly states that if the maximum period of confinement is “at least one year,” then that crime qualifies. The fact authorities graded Ulloa’s offense as a misdemeanor is irrelevant.
Case Details
Oscar Rene Perdomo Ulloa is a native and citizen of Honduras who was admitted without inspection in 2000. In 2012, he pled guilty in Virginia to a Class 1 misdemeanor for identity fraud “knowingly and with the intent to defraud, transfer, sell, or use another person’s identity to obtain… money, credit, loans, goods, services.” Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-186.3(A)(2). Punishment for the charge is confinement in jail for not more than twelve months. Ulloa received a suspended sentence of 30 days in jail.
DHS subsequently commenced removal proceedings against Perdomo Ulloa. He conceded removability and filed an application for cancellation of removal under INA § 240A(b)(1) [8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)]. The immigration judge (IJ) ruled that Perdomo Ulloa was ineligible for cancellation of removal because he had been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude and because he had been convicted of a crime for which a sentence of one year or longer may be imposed, INA §§ 237(a)(2)(A)(i) and 240A(b)(1)(C).
Perdomo Ulloa appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which affirmed. Perdomo Ulloa then filed a motion to reconsider based on Belcher v. Commonwealth, 75 Va. App. 505 (2022), which was denied because Belcher was deemed distinguishable.
Court Decision
Petitioner subsequently filed two petitions for review with the Fourth Circuit: one for the BIA’s denial of cancellation and one for the denial of his motion for reconsideration. The Fourth Circuit asked two questions: (1) whether Petitioner’s Virginia conviction qualified as a crime involving moral turpitude and (2) whether Petitioner was convicted of a crime for which a sentence of one year or longer may be imposed under INA § 237(a)(2)(A)(i).
At oral argument, Perdomo Ulloa conceded that violation of Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-186.3(A)(2) categorically qualifies as a crime involving moral turpitude, thus settling Question One. As to Question Two, he presented three arguments for why a twelve-month maximum sentence did not qualify as “one year or longer.” The Court rejected each of these arguments in turn. The statute clearly states that if the maximum period of confinement is “at least one year,” then that crime qualifies. The fact that Perdomo Ulloa’s offense was graded as a misdemeanor is irrelevant to this analysis.
Immigration consequences from criminal convictions can be far reaching and last a lifetime. Even though Perdomo Ulloa was only sentenced to 30 days in jail, his conviction alone rendered him ineligible for cancellation of removal. Any crime for which a person “may be sentenced” to a year or more in jail disqualifies that person from cancellation of removal, it doesn’t matter how long the person was actually sentenced.
As always, ILBSG actively monitors ongoing U.S. immigration news. If you have questions about any U.S. immigration related issue, contact us. Working with an experienced attorney ensures you get the right advice based on the most recent laws. In an ever-evolving immigration policy landscape, it’s particularly critical you get the right advice.