Audrey Grant v. William Barr, U. S. Atty Gen

Case: 18-60139 Document: 00515076100 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/14/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 18-60139 FILED August 14, 2019 Lyle W. Cayce AUDREY IVY GRANT, Clerk Petitioner v. WILLIAM P. BARR, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A075 887 004 Before HAYNES, GRAVES, and HO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Audrey Ivy Grant, a lawful permanent resident, challenges the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings. Grant argues that her attorney was ineffective for conceding before the Immigration Judge (“IJ”) that her prior state conviction was a crime involving moral turpitude (“CIMT”) under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) 1 that * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1Section 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) reads, in relevant part, “any alien convicted of, or who admits having committed, or who admits committing acts which constitute the essential Case: 18-60139 Document: 00515076100 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/14/2019 No. 18-60139 was not eligible for the CIMT “petty offense” exception. 2 Because Grant was ineligible for the petty offense exception, Grant fails to show that her counsel was ineffective or that the BIA abused its discretion in denying her motion. Accordingly, Grant’s petition for review is DENIED. I. In 2004, Grant pleaded guilty to securing the execution of a document by deception, in violation of Tex. Penal Code § 32.46(a)(1). 3 In Grant’s case, the offense was a state jail felony 4 with a maximum penalty of two years’ confinement in a state jail. She was sentenced to, inter alia, three years’ deferred adjudication and placed on community supervision for three years. In 2012, upon returning to the United States from a trip to Ghana, Grant was stopped at the Atlanta airport and charged with inadmissibility for having been convicted of a CIMT based on her prior Texas conviction. During her removal proceedings before an IJ, Grant’s former counsel conceded that her Texas conviction was a CIMT and that her conviction did not fall within the petty offense exception. The attorney then filed an application elements of-- a crime involving moral turpitude (other than a purely political offense) or an attempt or conspiracy to commit such a crime . . . is inadmissible.” 2 An alien is eligible for the petty offense exception if: the maximum penalty possible for the crime of which the alien was convicted (or which the alien admits having committed or of which the acts that the alien admits having committed constituted the essential elements) did not exceed imprisonment for one year and, if the alien was convicted of such crime, the alien was not sentenced to a term of imprisonment in excess of 6 months (regardless of the extent to which the sentence was ultimately executed). ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals