Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

felonyprobationvisapiracy
felonyprobationvisapiracy

Related Cases

Strato v. Ashcroft
View Case »
Sandoval-Lua v. Gonzales
View Case »
Savoury v. United States AG
View Case »
Leiva v. Secy., Department of Homeland Security
View Case »
Najera-Rodriguez v. Barr
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Barikyan v. Barr

Facts

Aleksandr Eduardovich Barikyan, a native and citizen of Russia, entered the U.S. on a temporary visa in December 1996 and became a lawful permanent resident in December 2008. In February 2016, he was convicted of conspiracy to commit money laundering under 18 U.S.C. 1956(h) and sentenced to three years' probation, along with a forfeiture order of $120,000. Following this conviction, the Department of Homeland Security charged him as an aggravated felon, leading to removal proceedings.

Aleksandr Eduardovich Barikyan, a native and citizen of Russia, entered the U.S. on a temporary visa in December 1996 and became a lawful permanent resident in December 2008. In February 2016, he was convicted of conspiracy to commit money laundering under 18 U.S.C. 1956(h) and sentenced to three years' probation, along with a forfeiture order of $120,000. Following this conviction, the Department of Homeland Security charged him as an aggravated felon, leading to removal proceedings.

Issue

Whether Barikyan's conviction for conspiracy to commit money laundering under 18 U.S.C. 1956(h) qualifies as an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(D) and whether the evidence supported the finding that he laundered more than $10,000.

Whether Barikyan's conviction for conspiracy to commit money laundering under 18 U.S.C. 1956(h) qualifies as an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(D) and whether the evidence supported the finding that he laundered more than $10,000.

Rule

Under 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(D), an aggravated felony includes offenses described in section 1956 of Title 18, provided the amount of funds involved exceeds $10,000. Conspiracy to commit money laundering is criminalized under 18 U.S.C. 1956(h).

Under 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(D), an aggravated felony includes offenses described in section 1956 of Title 18, provided the amount of funds involved exceeds $10,000. Conspiracy to commit money laundering is criminalized under 18 U.S.C. 1956(h).

Analysis

The court determined that Barikyan's conviction for conspiracy to commit money laundering fell under the definition of an aggravated felony as outlined in 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(D). The court found that the plain statutory language supported this classification. Additionally, the court upheld the BIA's finding that the evidence presented, including the forfeiture order, met the clear and convincing standard required to establish that Barikyan laundered more than $10,000.

The court determined that Barikyan's conviction for conspiracy to commit money laundering fell under the definition of an aggravated felony as outlined in 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(D). The court found that the plain statutory language supported this classification. Additionally, the court upheld the BIA's finding that the evidence presented, including the forfeiture order, met the clear and convincing standard required to establish that Barikyan laundered more than $10,000.

Conclusion

The court denied Barikyan's petition for review, affirming the BIA's decision that his conviction constituted an aggravated felony and that the evidence supported the removal order.

The court denied Barikyan's petition for review, affirming the BIA's decision that his conviction constituted an aggravated felony and that the evidence supported the removal order.

Who won?

The government prevailed in the case, as the court upheld the BIA's decision to classify Barikyan's conviction as an aggravated felony and affirmed the removal order based on the evidence presented.

The government prevailed in the case, as the court upheld the BIA's decision to classify Barikyan's conviction as an aggravated felony and affirmed the removal order based on the evidence presented.

You must be