Argued: September 25, 2018
Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Madeline Jean Cohen, WILEY REIN LLP, Washington, D.C., for
S. Conrad, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington,
D.C., for Respondent.
Appelbaum, CAPITAL AREA IMMIGRANTS' RIGHTS (CAIR)
COALITION, Washington, D.C.; P. Nicholas Peterson, WILEY REIN
LLP, Washington, D.C., for Petitioner.
A. Readler, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Mary Jane
Candaux, Assistant Director, Office of Immigration
Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
NIEMEYER, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Jack Mauricio-Vasquez is a lawful permanent resident of the
United States and a native and citizen of Peru. Before us is
his petition for review of the determination by the Board of
Immigration Appeals that he is removable under the
Immigration and Nationality Act (the "INA") based
on his commission of a crime involving moral turpitude within
five years of his admission to the United States.
Board found that the Department of Homeland Security
("DHS") proved by clear and convincing evidence
that Mauricio-Vasquez's date of admission was in 2008,
less than five years before he committed Virginia felony
abduction in 2012. We disagree, and therefore grant
Mauricio-Vasquez's petition for review, vacate the order
of removal, and remand to the agency with instructions to
grant Mauricio-Vasquez's motion to terminate removal
began removal proceedings against Mauricio-Vasquez in January
2016, charging that he was removable under Section
237(a)(2)(A)(i) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. §
1227(a)(2)(A)(i). A noncitizen is removable under that
section if he is convicted of a crime involving moral
turpitude committed within five years after his date of
is no dispute that Mauricio-Vasquez was convicted on July 12,
2013 of felony abduction in violation of Va. Code Ann. §
18.2-47, and that he committed the offense on September 13,
2012. What is in dispute is Mauricio-Vasquez's date of
admission to the United States, which in turn determines
whether DHS met its burden to prove by clear ...