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

probation
probation

Related Cases

Shortt v. Dick Clark’s AB Theatre, LLC
View Case »
Gutierrez-Brizuela v. Lynch
View Case »
Esquivel v. Mukasey
View Case »
Ramon-Sepulveda v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
View Case »
Diaz-Zanatta v. Holder
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Lagunas-Salgado v. Holder

Facts

Jesus Lagunas-Salgado, a Mexican native and citizen, first entered the United States in 1977. He received United States permanent resident status in 1990. He and his wife, also a lawful permanent resident, have three children. Ten years after receiving permanent resident status, Lagunas-Salgado was convicted in federal court of fraud in connection with identification documents in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1028(a)(2). He received a sentence of five months' imprisonment and two years' probation. In 2003, three years after his conviction, Lagunas-Salgado took a trip to Mexico, and, when he returned, presented himself for inspection to the United States Department of Homeland Security. Early the next year, DHS initiated removal proceedings against him by filing a Notice to Appear that charged he was inadmissible as an alien convicted of a crime of moral turpitude.

Jesus Lagunas-Salgado, a Mexican native and citizen, first entered the United States in 1977. He received United States permanent resident status in 1990. He and his wife, also a lawful permanent resident, have three children. Ten years after receiving permanent resident status, Lagunas-Salgado was convicted in federal court of fraud in connection with identification documents in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1028(a)(2). He received a sentence of five months' imprisonment and two years' probation. In 2003, three years after his conviction, Lagunas-Salgado took a trip to Mexico, and, when he returned, presented himself for inspection to the United States Department of Homeland Security. Early the next year, DHS initiated removal proceedings against him by filing a Notice to Appear that charged he was inadmissible as an alien convicted of a crime of moral turpitude.

Issue

Whether Lagunas-Salgado's conviction for fraud in connection with identification documents constitutes a crime involving moral turpitude.

Whether Lagunas-Salgado's conviction for fraud in connection with identification documents constitutes a crime involving moral turpitude.

Rule

A conviction for a crime involving moral turpitude with a maximum penalty exceeding one year's imprisonment renders an alien inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2)(A).

A conviction for a crime involving moral turpitude with a maximum penalty exceeding one year's imprisonment renders an alien inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2)(A).

Analysis

The BIA concluded that Lagunas-Salgado's conviction for violating 18 U.S.C. 1028(a)(2) was one involving moral turpitude because it inherently involved fraud and impeded the efficiency of the government by deceit and dishonesty. The BIA has long considered fraud a crime of moral turpitude. Lagunas-Salgado's argument that he was not defrauding the customers who bought false documents was rejected, as the BIA found that knowingly selling false official identification documents involves inherently deceptive conduct.

The BIA concluded that Lagunas-Salgado's conviction for violating 18 U.S.C. 1028(a)(2) was one involving moral turpitude because it inherently involved fraud and impeded the efficiency of the government by deceit and dishonesty. The BIA has long considered fraud a crime of moral turpitude. Lagunas-Salgado's argument that he was not defrauding the customers who bought false documents was rejected, as the BIA found that knowingly selling false official identification documents involves inherently deceptive conduct.

Conclusion

The petition for review was denied, affirming the BIA's determination that Lagunas-Salgado's conviction was for a crime involving moral turpitude.

The petition for review was denied, affirming the BIA's determination that Lagunas-Salgado's conviction was for a crime involving moral turpitude.

Who won?

The government prevailed in the case because the court upheld the BIA's conclusion that Lagunas-Salgado's conviction involved moral turpitude.

The government prevailed in the case because the court upheld the BIA's conclusion that Lagunas-Salgado's conviction involved moral turpitude.

You must be