Kellermann v. Holder, http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/10a0010p-06.pdf
In this case, the Court had the opportunity to address whether a conviction under 18 USC 371 and 1001 (conspiracy to make a false statement) was a CIMT. The Court answered in the affirmative. The decision is notable for the CIMT analysis. While the Court cited to Silva-Trevino, the Court did not adopt the AG's 3rd step, instead limiting the analysis to a limited examination of the record of conviction.
The Court also found that the repeal of 212(c) did not have an impermissible retroactive effect on a noncitizen that elected to go to trial on a criminal charge, joining the majority of circuits.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment