Immigration – Removal – moral turpitude

Listen to this article

U.S. Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Civil

Civil

Immigration – Removal – moral turpitude

The BIA did not unreasonably conclude that a Wisconsin conviction for fleeing or eluding a police officer in violation of sec. 346.04(3) categorically constituted a crime involving moral turpitude.

“The Board’s determination that Wisconsin Statute § 346.04(3) categorically qualifies as a crime involving moral turpitude is a reasonable one. It is also consistent with decisions our sister circuits have reached when evaluating similar statutes. See Idowu v. Attorney Gen., 512 Fed. Appx. 222, 225 (3rd Cir. 2013) (unpublished) (agreeing with immigration judge that New Jersey conviction for knowingly evading police and in the process creating a risk of death or injury to a third person is a crime of moral turpitude); Ruiz-Lopez v. Holder, 682 F.3d 513, 521 (6th Cir. 2012) (‘fleeing from a police vehicle qualifies as the type of societally condemned, reprehensible conduct that is reasonably encompassed by the BIA’s general definition of a [crime involving moral turpitude]’); Pulido-Alatorre v. Holder, 381 Fed. Appx. 355, 359 (5th Cir. 2010) (unpublished) (upholding the Board’s determination that misdemeanor conviction for evading arrest with a vehicle in violation of Texas Penal Code § 38.04(a) is crime involving moral turpitude where petitioner pled guilty to intentionally fleeing from an officer lawfully at-tempting to detain him and Board found ‘such conduct reflects an awareness and conscious disregard of a substantial and unjustifiable risk’).” Petition Denied.

13-2470 Cano-Oyarzabal v. Holder

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, Williams, J.

Full Text