Edgar Armando Valenzuela-Garcia, A079 651 539 (BIA March 10, 2011)

8/22/2019 Edgar Armando Valenzuela-Garcia, A079 651 539 (BIA March 10, 2011)

1/12

A MERCEDES RYDEN, ESQUIRE3300 N. Central Avenue Ste 650

Phoenix 85012

US Department ofJustice

Executive Oce r Imigraon Review

Board ofImmigation AppealsOce of the Clek

5107Jeesb1rg Pik, S1it2000Fal Cc1 Vrin 2204/

OHS/ICE ice of Chef Counsel - FL

P0 Box 25158

Phoenix 85002

Name: VALENZUEA-GARCIA, EDGAR ARMAND A079-651-539

Date of this notice 3/10/2011

Ecosed s a copy of he Boad's ecso ad order in the above-reenced case.

Ecosure

Pae Membes:Coe atca A.Fu Lau Pauley oge

Snceel,

Doa CarChief Clerk

Cite as: Edgar Armando Valenzuela-Garcia, A079 651 539 (BIA March 10, 2011)


2/12

U Department ofJustice

Executie Oce Immigation Review

Board ofImmigration AppealsOce of the Clerk

5/07 lesbrg Pik, Si1 2000Fa Chrc Vrgina 2204

VAENZUEAGARCIA, EDGAR ARMAND3250 N PNA PARKWAY AVE079-651-539

OHS/ICE ice of Chief Counsel FLP Box 25158Phoenx, 85002

FLRENCE 85132

Name VAENZUEA-GARCIA, EDGAR ARMAND A079-651539

Date of ths notce: 3/10/2011

Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decsion in the above-refeenced case Ths copy is bengprovided to you as a coesy. Your attorney or repesentatve has been seed wit thsdecison pusuant to 8 C.F.R 1292S(a). If te attached decision odes that yo be emovedrom the United tates or afirms an Immigration Jdge's decision oderng that yo beemoved, any petton for review of the attached decison mst be fied with and receved by theappopiate cot of appeas wthin 30 days of the date of the decison

Encosure

Panel Membes:Cole, Patricia AFippu, Lauri S.Pauley, Roge

Sincere Iv.

D Ct

Donna CaChief Clek



3/12

U.S epartmnt fJsticeEx O o Rw

Do of Bod of go App

F C Virgnia 22041

File: A079 651 539 - Florence, A

re EDGAR ARMANDO VALENZELAGARCIA

IN BOND PROCEEDINGS

APPEAL

Date

ON BEHAF OF RESPONDEN A. Mercedes Ryden, Esquire

ON BEHALF OF HS: Vctoria LeviAssistant Chief Counse

APLICAION Custody redetermnaton

MAR 0 2

he respondent, a native and citizen of Mexico, has appeaed o a Iigration Judge'sSepteber 13, 2010, decision deying his request r a chge custody status O October 3,2010, the Iigration Judge issued a bond eorand seing rth the reasons r the onddecisio he migratio Judge und that he acked jurisdiction to cosider the respondent'srequest r a change n custody status, inasuch as the respondent is subect to the andatodetention provsions der secton 236(c) of the Iiation and Nationality Act, 8 .SC.

1226(c) The Deprtment of Homeand Secity (DHS,) has led a otion r suaarance. he respondents appeal ill be sustaed.

The record reects that the respondent as convicted in 2004 r the oense of possession ofburglary tools i vioation of sections 3-1501, 13-1505, 13610, 13-701, 13702, 13-702., 13-70,and 13802 of the Azoa Revised Statutes he respondent also s covicted in 2006 of lsereporting to a la enrcement agency in violation of sectios 13-29071, 13-07, and 13802 of theArizona Revsed Statutes he respondent s charged th reovabiy under secton237(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act r havng been convcted of o or more crmes nvolving moraltupitude.

Wth regard to the respondents conviction r lse reportng to aaw enrcement agency, theIgration Judge hed that, under a odied categorical appoach, the convicton docents raisete ossibliy" that the esondent's ovton stemed om his dese to ntetonay misleadpolice ocers o crying out an arrest (.J. at 7) The Imigration Judge specically cited therelease uestionnare, hch contains a probable cause stateent o the rrestng ocer that, uponrest r possession of aruana, the respondent provided a se nae and date of bith and thatonce a real name as und, a arrant as und a pobatio voation.



4/12

{079 651 39

ARS secton 329070 provides

A It is nawl r a person to knowingy make to a law enrcement agency of either thsstate or a poitical sbdivision of this state a false, adlent or nded report orstatemet or to kowingly misrepresent a ct r the prpose of interfering with the orderyoperation of a law enrcement agency or msleading a peace ocer

B. Violatio of this section is a cass misdemeaor

The Arizona statte nder which the respondent was convicted is not categorically a crimeinvolving moral trpitde becase a conviction does not necessarily reqire a showing of intent todead The Immigration Jdge conclded that the conviction docments in the bond record raisethe possibility" that the respondets conviction stemmed om hs desre to intentionay misleadpolice ocers om carryng ot a aest, and ths hs convicton potentialy is within the ambit ofthe deition of a crime invoving moral trptde (.J at 7) We stated i Matter ofJoseph 22 &N

Dec 799 806 (BIA 999) tha the Immgraton Jdge mst necessarly look rward to what slikely to be shown dring the hearing on the nderyng removal case" in deteining whether analien is properly ncded n a mandatory detenton category Id. at 807 I ths case, we nd thatthe ct that he bond record raises the possibiity" that the respondent's conviction stemmed omintentionaly misleading a police ocer is not scient to spport a nding that he respondent hasnot met his brden of proof to show that the DHS is sbstantialy nlikely to prevail on the removalcharge hs, we nd that the respondent s not properly nclded n a mandatory detenton categoad s eligible r bond herere, we need not address the respondents argment that hsconviction r possession of brgla toos is not a crime invovg mora trpitde.

Accordingly, the llowing orders are entered

ORER he Immigration Jdges bond decision is vacated

FRHER ORER The record is remanded r a bond detenation nder section 236) ofthe Act

FOR HE BO


5/12

UNITED STATS DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICEEXECUTVE OFFICE FOR GRATON REVEW

IMMGRATION COURT3260 Norh Pinal Parkway

Florence, Arizona 85132

IN THE MATTER OF:

VALENZUELA-GARCA, EdgarArmando

On Behalf of the Respondent:A. Mercedes Ryan, Esq.3300 North Central AvenueSute 650Phoenx, Arzona 850

In Bnd Proceedings

Fie No.: 079651539

Date: October 3, 010

On Behaf of the DS:Vctora evn, Esq.Assstant Chef CounselDepartent of Hoeland Securty350North Pnal ParkayForence, Arzona 8513

BOND MEMOANDU OF THE IGRATON JUDGE

I. Background

On August , 00, the Departent of Hoeand Securty HS) ssed a Notce to AppearNTA) that charged the Respondent th reovablty pursant to secton 37a))A)) of thegraton and Natonaty Act A or Act), as aended Reova Ex. ) In spport of thsreova charge, HS alleges that on Apr 1, 06, the Respondent as convcted r the oenseof se reportng to a la enrceent ocer, n volaton of sectons 13-07, 3707, and 13-80 of the Arzona Revsed Statutes ARS). (Id)More recenty, on Septeber I0, 010, HS leda For -61 Addtona Charges of nadssblty/Deportablty) that addtonally charged theRespondentth reovabl pursuant to INA secton 3 7 a))A)) Reova Ex. ) In support

of ths second reoval charge, HS separately alleges that on October 8, 004, the Respondent asconvcted r the oense of possesson of brgary tools, n volaton ofA.RS 131501, 3505,3, 3-, 3, 3, 3, 3, ad 13. )

On Agst 7, 0 0, the Respondent led a oton r custody redeternaton, ad a bondhearng as convened on Septeber 13, 00, to consder ths oton Bond Exs. a) and b))

,

,


6/12

In re Edgar Armando Vaula-Garcia, A079-5-539 Tayor Bnd Memo & Order 03200

II Applcable Law

eneally, an alen who s n the cstody of DHS ay apply to an gaton Co r aredetenaton of hs o he cstody stats at any te bee a depotaton or eova ore

'

becoes adnstatvey na. 8 CFR 236(d) he Igaton Cot howeve has ncstody redeternaton athorty over aens sbject to the andatoy detenton povsons ofsecton 236(c) of the Act See Matter ofRojas, 23 I&N Dec. 1 2 (BA 200) (he eglatonsdo not gve gaton Jdges bond rsdcton ove aens who are popely sbject to andatoydetenton") he gaton Jdge has lted rsdcton to esolve whether an alen s propelyncded" wthn the andatoy detenton povsons See 8 CF.R 0039(h)()() & (). InMatter ofJoeph, 22 I&N Dec 99 802 (BIA 999) the Bod of Igaton Appeas (BA orBoard) held that an aen s not popely nclded" wthn a andatoy detenton catego f theaton Cot deternes that DHS s sbstantaly nlkely" to be able to establsh or povea charge of reovabty that sbjects the alen to andatory detenton

III Analy

DHS has charged that the Respondent s eovabe nder sectons 3(a)()(A)() and ()Accodngy psant to sectons 236(c)( )(B) and (C) he s ony sbect to andato detentonfhe has been convcted of two ces nvolvng oral tpte or f ethe of hs convctons canbe recognzed as a ce nvovng oa tptde accopaned by a ter of psonent of atleast year." INA 236(c)( )(B) & (C)

A Cme Involvng oal Tuptude Famewok

he nted States Co of Appeals the Nnth Crct has held that [a ce of oralttde s one nvovng condct that s nherently base ve o depaved and contr to epvate an socal dtes an owes to hs fellow en or to socety n genera'Alvarez-Reynaga Holder, 59 F3d 534 536 (9th Cr 200) (qotng NavarroLopez v Gonale, 503 F3d 03108 (9th Cr. 200) (en ban)) he Attoey eneal has also provde a new aewok detenng whethe a partclar convcton constttes a crie nvolvng oral tptde hodngthat an IJ ay consder elabe evdence otsde the stct record of convcton n ode to detenef a convcton s one that has the characterstcs of a CIM The A aso gave a shorthandsa of a CM whch s not nconsstent wth the CMT tests epoyed by the BA and NnthCrct n the past: ]o qal as a ce nvolvng oral tptde r pposes of the Act ace st nvolve both epehensble condct and soe degree of scente whether specc ntent

delbeateness wlness o eckessness" Matter of SilvaTrevino, 24 &N Dec 68 689 n.

W al s rovabl udr sco 27(a)(2)(A)() ofh Ac fh as b "covcd ofa crr wc a sc of o ya o logr ay b posd hs goud ofrovaby oy subjcs a a oadao do fh ctu cral sc s a of pso of a las I yar A 26(c)( I )C)


7/12

In r dar Armando VanzuaGar/a A07965 l-59 Tay Bnd Mem & Ode 0-3200

(A 2008) (citing precedent o other circuits s to the scentemens ea eeent), thoughrecklessness hs been hed to be outside the scope of CM in the Ninth Circuit nd cnot suppo CM under the NA, s hed in Feandez-uz Gonzaes 48 F3d 159, 5 (9 Cir200), nd Ua v ode 57 F3d 04, 020 (9 Cir 2009)

1n MamoeoCamos v ode 558 F3d 903, 90 (9 Cir 2009) (en an) the Ninth

Circuit held tht becse the Attoey Gener's denition of crie involving orl tuitudeils to prticurize' the ter in ny eningl y giving it Cheon derence hs noprcticl signicnce" (cittions nd quottions oitted); Nunez ode 594 F3d 1 24, 30 n3(9 Cir 2010) (e hve held tht, t this stge of our nlysis, we 'rel(y] on our own generalizeddeiion of he erm moral urpiude becuse the BA hs iled to provide ny genericdenition to hich e coud eninglly defer") (ephsis dded) (quoting \amoeoCamos558 F3d t 910) nsted, it is the Bord's orl turpitude nlysis conducted through csebycse dudiction" tht receives Ninth Circuit deference MamoeoCamos 558 F3d

t 903, 91; amos-Loez ode 53 F3d 855, 859 (9

Cir 2009) (he BA's constctionof oral turpitde' though process of csebycse dudiction is entited to Chevondeference")

Nevertheless, the Ninth Circuit hs recognized tht its orking denition of CM is notterialy dierent o the BA 's orking denition, see Ua ode sua 57 F 3d 04,t 09 n (9 Cir 2009):

As e noted in MamoeoCamos to dte, the Bord's denition of orltuitde" hs been so vgue nd generized s to renderCheon deference eninglessMamoeoCamos 558 F3d t 90 Accordingy, e hve relied on our denition of theter Id he to denitions do not dier terily," d and ny dierence is irrelevnt

to the present cse

herere, this Cou perceives no signicnt dierence nd i ook r the chrcteristicsof CM discussed in the Circuit's decisions, such s NavaoLoez and MamoeoCamossua s ell s the histo of siilr discussions of the nture of CM by the Bord nd AG

o determine hether n lien's prior oense is one tht ctegoricly invoves orltuitude, imigrtion udges ust deterine hether there is relistic probbility, not theoretic possibility,' tht the Stte or Feder criin sttute pursunt to hich the ien sconvicted old be ppied to rech conduct tht does not invove orl turpitude" \atte o/iaTevino 24 &N Dec 87, 89-90 (AG 2008)

As recognized by both the Bord nd the Ninth Circit, here the ctegoricl nlysis doesnot resove the or turpitde inquiry in prticr cse, n ddictor soud proceed ith odied ctegoric inqiry Matte o/aeino 2 &N Dec t 8990; Nunez 59 F3d29-30 nder the odied ctegoric pproch the igrtion Cort condcts n eintionofthe sttuto denition, chrging docuent, ritten pe greeent, trnscript of pe colloquy,nd ny explicit ctu nding by the tri judge to hich the defendnt ssented" head


8/12

In re Edgar rmand ValeneaGarcia A0795S9 Tay B Mem & Orer 03200

UnitedStates 544 S 3, 6 (2005) This list is smply lstrative and other docents of eqalreliability may also be considered" United States . Sneenberger, 548 3 699, 70 9th Cr2008) (en ban; Unite States Strickand 60 3 963, 968 9th Cir 200) (en ban

As the Attoey General rther nstrcted in Matter ofSiaTreino, [hen the record ofconvction is inconclsive, dges may, to the extent they dee it necessary and appropriate,conder evidence beyond the rmal record of conviction he goal o ths inqry is to dsce thenatre of the nderyng convction here a mere examination of the statte tsel does not yied thenecessa nrmaton; t s not an occasion to relitgate cts or determinations ade n the earliercrimina proceeding" Maer ofSiaTreino 24 &N Dec at 690 Siply pt ths SiaTreinothirdstep inq permts a exanaton of docments that old not necessary be consideredhen analyzing a conviction nder a secondstep modied categorical approach

. Possession of Bugla Tools

In the instant case, DHS has presented a record of conviction that dscloses he Respondentas convcted r the oense o possession of brgla toos, in volaton ofARS 350, 3505, 360, 3-70, 3702, 37020, 3707, 3-80, and 3802 Bond Ex 3) Section 3505 of the Arizona Revised Stattes provides the denition r this partclar crina oense, inpertnent part, as los

A A person coits possession of brgla tools by: Possessing any exposive, too, instrent or other artice adapted orcommony sed r commiting any rm of brgla as dened in 3506, 3507ad 3508and intending to se or peit the se of schan item in the cossion of a brgary2 Bying, seng, transferring, possessing or sing a otor vehicemaniplation key or aster key

On this topic, the Bod has held that an oense involving the possession o brgla tooscod constitte a crime involving moral trpitde here the possession o the tools is to comita morally trpitdinous brgla, sch as one accompanied by an intent to comit larceny or other

Uness and except hen historicay reqred to look beyond the criina cort'sconvicton docments r proof of a ct or ctor that is reqred nder the A r imigration

la prposes that od not have been reqred or necessary r the crmnal cort to consider ndetermining the ct of conviction, sch as the $0000 oss eement of a ad reatedAggravated Felny, or the proteering natre a pping r prostittion reated cnvctn orthe type of volatin of a dmestic vilence protection order nder precedent sch as hawan oder 29 SCt 2294 (2009) erreira shcro 390 3 09 (9 Cir 2004) Matter ofBabaisako 24 & Dec 306 BA 2007); atter ofertsenshteyn 24 &N Dec BIA2007); and Saai . oder 572 3 975 (9 Cr 2009)

4


9/12=

In r e Edar rmand VaenuaGarcia A0795539 Tayor B Mo & Orr 1013-2010

turptdinous cme o comaton of cmes Mae oSea 20 &N Dec 579 584 (A 992)ycontast a defendat can e convicted nde ARS. 3 5052) meey yng, seng,tansg possessing o using a moto vehcle manplaton key o maste key" ecause thepossession of sch items does not necessaly invove moa tupitude" Maer oSerna 20 &NDec at 585 a covicton nde A.R.S. 3505 oud not e ecognied as a categorca" cimenvovng moa turpitde

Stil in sppot of the contention that this covcton cold ai as a cme vovigoa tutude DHS has sumitted a crmnal complant, cma inmatio eeaseestonnae and various Docket sheets (ond Ex 3) The Docket sheets spec that theResponde_nt enteed a pea of gity to the ong

(Id)

OFFENS Cot Possesson of gla ToosClass Six 6) UndesgnatedARS 3502 505, 60 70 702 7020 707 80 and 802Date of Oense 08252004on Dangeos on Repetitve

n t, count to ofthe ndelyng crmnal naton povdes the ong ctua asis the Respondet's guiy pea

(I)

EDGAR ARANDO VALEZUEAGARCA aka DGAR A GARCA, o oaout the day of Agust 2004 possessed A SCREDVER, an explosve, tool,struet o othe acle adapted o commoly sed comting any ofga ad ntended to use o permtted ts se the comsso of a rga, voation of AR.S 350 3505 330 3302 3303 3304 370 3702, 37020 and 380

Futhe detaling the ctual asis of the Respondents covicton is the aemetonedeease estionae

THE RGARY OCCUD AT 525 SOTHER, TEP HE ASDENTIFED Y A TNESS AS ENG TH PERSON HO LOOKD OUT"WHLE THE OTHER SJECT ROKE NTO TH CAR AS E ASDETIED AS THE DVE THE VEHCLE ED T EE A ETH HAT APPEARED TO E ETHAPHTANE RESIDUE ASOD UNDER HIS SEAT HS VEHCE AND A SCREDVER ASALSO OCATED THE VEHICLE ETRY INTO THE VEHC AS ADESNG A SCRDRIVER TO REAK THE NDO. HE WAS OOKEDAND HELD TO SEE A JUDGE

5

, i"I. .


10/12

In re dgar Armando Valen'e/aGara A079-65-539 Tay n Mem & Orer 0200

d)

The Immigration Court need not determine at this time whether the release uestionnaire may

be permissiby reied on in the remova proceeding to help resolve the mora turpitude inuiry.Rather, as this is a bond proceeding any inrmation that is avaiable shoud be considered under8 C.F.R 003 9(d). Based on these underlying conviction docuents it appears that theRespondent's intended use o the burga toos was to burgarize another vehicle. As such conductis potentiay morally turpitudinous, the Immigration Court concludes that HS is not substantiallyunikely to estabish that the Respondent's conviction r the oense o possession o burga toolsualies as a crime invoving mora turpitude. See Ye v NS 24 F.3d 28, 3 n. (9th Cir2000) (Ye was convicted o two counts o vehice burgla, which is a crie o ora turpitude thatcaies a possible sentence o one year or longer);see als Maer fussan, 24 &N ec. 74,78 (BIA 2009) (applying the SlvaTrevn amework to a burgla oense and concluding thatoral tuitude is ierent in the act o burglary o an occupied dweling).

C Fase Repong o a Law Encemen Agency

S has presented her evidence that the Respondent was also convicted r the oenseo lse reporting to a law enrceent agency, in vioation o A.R.S. 32907.0, 707 and 802.(Bond Ex. 4.) Section 32907.0 othe Arizona Revised Statutes provides in pertinent part that [itis unlawl r a person to knowingly ake to a law enrcement agency o either this state or apolitical subdivision othis state a lse, uduent or ununded report or stateent or to knowingyisrepresent a ct r the prpose o interring with the orderly operation o a law enrceentagency or miseading a peace ocer.

Still, citing Blanc v Musey 8 F.3d 74 (9th Cir. 2008), the Respondent contends thathis conviction r the oense o lse reporting to a law enrcement agency caot be recognizedas a crime involving mora turpitude. In Blanc the Ninth Circuit intereted whether al. PenalCode 48.9(a) constitutes a crie invoving moral turpitude. Cal. Penal Code 48.9(a) providesas lows:

Any person who lsey represents or identies himsel or hersel as another personoras a ctitious person to any peace ocer . . . upon a law detention or aest othe person either to evade the process o the court, or to evade the properidentication o the person by the investigating ocer is guity o a misdemeanor.

TheNinth Circuit ultiately concuded that Cal. Pena Code 489(a) is not categoricaya crie involving mora tritde because an intent to deaud s neither eplicit in the statutodenition' o the crime [nor ipicit in the nature o the crime. See Blanc 58 F.3d at 79(citing Gdeshtein v NS 8 F3d 64, 648 9th Cir. 993)). The ourt rst deteined that audwas not explicit in the statuto denition because its text ony reuires a owing provision olse inrmation. d The Court rther held that an intent to deaud is not part o the crimesessential nature since there is no reuirement that a deendant obtain soething tangibe,

6


11/12

In re Edgr Armndo lnzuelGr A079-5-539 IJ Tay Bond eo & Ode 01-2010

nduce another to act to hs or her detrment," or express a specc ntent to avod aest" d at192

Whe A.RS 329 s not dentca to Cal enal Code 48.9(a), t coud be sadto contan some of the same characterstcs und by the Nnth Crcut n Bla as ackng moraturptude. For nstance, f a dendant could be convcted under A.R.S. 329. r merelymakng any lse or ununded statement or report to a aw enrcement agency, then some suchconduct may not be a CM. Such behavor may consttute a kowng provson of senaton," whch mght not be morally turptudnous S Bla 518 F3d at 19. However, asthe Board has hed, even unswo lscaton to authortes can be a CM Ma fJuad 24

. I&N Dec 29, 3435 (BA 26).

An exanaton of the statutory text, however, does not end the mmgraton Court's moralturptude nqu, as both the crnal noaton and reease questonare provde nrmaton that

potentay assst n clrng the ctual bass ofthe Respondents crmnal cnvcton e crmnanaton provdes hat the Respondent knowngly made to the EMPE OIEDEARMEN I OFFCER M Carleton, #469, a lse, auduent, or ununded repo orstatement, or knowngy msrepresented a ct, r the purpose of nterrng wth the orderlyoperatng of a law enrcement agency or mseadng an ocer, n volaton of AR.S. 329., 13, and 1382." More mpoanty, the release questonnare dscloses that theRespondent provded a se nae ad date of brth at the tme he was aested r possesson ofmaruana

E]DGAR VAENUEAGARCA WAS ARSED FOR OSS OFMAJA. AFER BEG ARESED, WAS EAED HA GARCIA

WAS GVNG FALSE NAME & DO.B. ONCE A REA NAME WAS FOD,A WARN WAS FOND FOR ROBAION VOLAON.

hese convcton documentsrase the possbly that the Respondents convcton r heoense of lse reportng to a aw enrcement agency stemmed om the Respondents desre tontentonally mslead polce ocers om carng out an aest he mmgraton Court concludesthat such conduct potentaly brngs the Respondents convcton wthn the ambt of the NnthCrcuts and BAs dentons ofa crme nvolvng mora tutude As Ma fJsph copelsmandato detenton so ong as DHS s not substantay unkey to preval on the ultmate reovalcharge, the mmgraton Court ay not assume the present record comprses the only evdence thatDHS wll be able to present at the remova hearng n seekng to resove the mora turptude

queston. S Ma fJsp supa at 86

herere, because of those ctors, the Immgraton Court deternes that DHS s notsubstantaly unkey to estabsh that the Respondents convcton r the oense of lse repongto a aw enrceent agency s a crme nvovng moral turptude. hus, t ows that theRespondents convcton r the oense of lse reportng to a aw enrcement agency ncombnaton wth hs separate convcton r the oense ofpossesson of burgary toos subects hmto mandatory detenton under secton 236(c)( )(B) of the Act

hM . .k 1 b 'w :64%vCo t v


12/12

In r Edgr rmndo V/1uGr, A079-6S-S39

D Concusion

Tyo Bond Meo & Oder 10-32010

The Immgrton Cot hs concded tht HS s not sbstntl nlke to estblsh htthe Respondents convcton r the oense of possesson of burgl tools s crme of morl

turude, nd tht HS s not sbstnll nlkel to estblsh tht the Respondent's convctonre oense of lse rertng to l enrcemen genc s crme nvolvng morl tupdeth subecng the espondent o mndto deenton nder INA seco 6(c)()(B).

Therere, the llong order shll be entered

IT IS HEBY FOUND, eercsng on he heren jrsdcton to deemne rsdcton,th the mmgton Court crentl lcks jrsdcton to redeterme the condtons of theResondents cstod becse t ppers tht he s sbec to the mndto detenon provsonsof scton 6(c)( )(B) of he ct

Bce A orUS Imgrton Jdge

CERICAE OF SRVICSERVICE BY Ml ( erson Servce (O 0 HS [ ] Alen Alens Attoe

DA lO-/ -loB Court St"c.

3As neither of the Respondent's convictions is accompanied by an actual cina sentence ofa "te ofmpisonent ofat east I yea, andato detention nde section 26(c)(I )(C) is not appicale in this case.

8

Documents

Edgar Armando Valenzuela-Garcia, A079 651 539 (BIA March 10, 2011)