00-1128 Flores-Leon v. INS

Listen to this article

“We join the First and the Ninth Circuits in concluding that Congress has clearly manifested an intent to apply the amended definition of ‘aggravated felony’ retroactively… Section 321 of IIRIRA contains a clear and express directive from Congress that the amended definition of ‘aggravated felony’ should be applied to any and all criminal violations committed by an alien after his or her entry into the United States, regardless of whether they were committed before or after the amended definition went into effect. Section 321(b) leaves Flores-Leon no room to argue otherwise, as it clearly states that the revised definition applies to convictions entered before the enactment date… Therefore, we agree that Flores-Leon was convicted of an ‘aggravated felony’ under the INA and, therefore this court does not have jurisdiction to review the merits of the immigration judge’s decision.

“Moreover, even if we had jurisdiction, the constitutional defects asserted by Flores-Leon are without merit. Flores-Leon claims that applying the 1996 amended definition of ‘aggravated felony’ to his 1994 conviction violates the Ex Post Facto Clause… The Ex Post Facto Clause prohibits the retrospective application of criminal laws that materially disadvantage the defendant… However, the Ex Post Facto Clause only applies to criminal laws.”

Dismissed.

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