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

felony
appealpleafelony

Related Cases

Silveyra v. Moschorak
View Case »
Gupta v. McGahey
View Case »
Kanyi v. Gonzales
View Case »
Farrar v. Hobby
View Case »
Ashfaque v. Holder
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Santana v. Barr

Facts

Santana, a Dominican Republic native, became a lawful permanent resident in the U.S. in 1988. He has a history of criminal convictions, including petit larceny in 2010 and possession of stolen property in the third degree in 2011, for which he was sentenced to one to three years in prison. In 2015, he was convicted of burglary in the first degree. The Department of Homeland Security charged him with removability based on these convictions, leading to the BIA's decision.

Santana was born in the Dominican Republic and admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident in 1988. Over the last decade he has had a string of criminal convictions. In January 2010 he pleaded guilty to petit larceny under New York Penal Law 155.25. In November 2011 he pleaded guilty to possession of stolen property in the third degree under New York Penal Law 165.50 and later was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of one to three years. In March 2015 he pleaded guilty to burglary in the first degree under New York Penal Law 140.30 and was sentenced to an eight-year term of imprisonment.

Issue

Whether Santana's conviction for criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree under New York Penal Law 165.50 is an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(G).

The central issue on appeal is whether Santana's conviction under New York Penal Law 165.50 for third-degree possession of stolen property is a removable aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(G).

Rule

An aggravated felony is defined under 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(G) as a theft offense (including receipt of stolen property) for which the term of imprisonment is at least one year.

Section 1101(a)(43)(G) defines an aggravated felony as 'a theft offense (including receipt of stolen property) or burglary offense for which the term of imprisonment [is] at least one year.'

Analysis

The court applied the categorical approach to determine if New York Penal Law 165.50 categorically fits within the federal definition of an aggravated felony. It concluded that the BIA's interpretation of the term 'including' in 1101(a)(43)(G) was reasonable, indicating that receipt of stolen property is not limited to offenses where the property was obtained by theft. The court found that Santana's knowing possession of stolen property implied an intent to deprive the owner of their rights.

The BIA's interpretation of the term 'including' in the parenthetical 'including receipt of stolen property' in 1101(a)(43)(G) is reasonable. As the BIA observed, the fact that the parenthetical says 'receipt of stolen property' rather than 'receipt of property obtained by theft' strongly suggests that Congress did not intend to limit receipt of stolen property to the generic federal definition of theft.

Conclusion

The court affirmed the BIA's decision, concluding that Santana's conviction for possession of stolen property was indeed an aggravated felony, thus upholding his removal from the United States.

For the following reasons, we DENY the petition for review.

Who won?

The government prevailed in the case, as the court upheld the BIA's decision to remove Santana based on his aggravated felony conviction.

The BIA dismissed Santana's appeal after concluding that possession of stolen property in violation of New York Penal Law 165.50 constituted an aggravated felony under 1101(a)(43)(G).

You must be