Ibarra-Hernandez v. Holder

Summarized by:

  • Court: 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Archives
  • Area(s) of Law: Immigration
  • Date Filed: 11-05-2014
  • Case #: 11-70739
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Per Curiam; Circuit Judges D. Nelson, Silverman, and M. Smith
  • Full Text Opinion

Using the Social Security number of an actual person without his knowledge or permission to get a job at a retail store is a crime involving moral turpitude.

Gloria Ibarra-Hernandez petitioned for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’s final order of removal. Ibarra-Hernandez is a citizen of Mexico that “entered the United States in 1994 without inspection.” In 2008, Ibarra-Hernandez pled guilty “to taking the identity of another in violation of [Arizona Revised Statutes] § 13-2008(A).” Ibarra-Hernandez “used the Social Security number of an actual person without his knowledge or permission to get a job at a retail store from April 9, 2006 to October 8, 2008.” Ibarra-Hernandez was sentenced to “90 days in jail and two years of supervised probation.” “The Department of Homeland Security subsequently initiated removal proceedings,” based on “being present without being admitted or paroled” and “for having committed a crime involving moral turpitude.” Ibarra-Hernandez applied for cancellation of removal arguing that her crime did not involve moral turpitude. The immigration judge and the Board of Immigration Appeals both found Ibarra-Hernandez’s crime involved moral turpitude, and determined Ibarra-Hernandez was “inadmissible and ineligible for cancellation of removal.” Ibarra-Hernandez petitioned for review of the final order of removal, and the Ninth Circuit considered whether Ibarra-Hernandez’s crime involved moral turpitude, which would make her ineligible for cancellation of removal. The panel found that under the modified categorical approach the crime did involve moral turpitude because “this particular offense was a form of theft involving fraud.” “[S]tealing a real person’s identity for the purpose of obtaining employment is inherently fraudulent, and therefore . . . involves moral turpitude.” The panel therefore found that Ibarra-Hernandez was ineligible for cancellation of removal, and denied her petition for review. PETITION DENIED.

Advanced Search