U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2016

Jorge Espinoza-Lugo v. Loretta E. Lynch

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided March 31, 2016 · Thomas, Christen, Seabright

647 F. App'x 699

Counsel

K. Lee Hartzler, Esquire, San Diego, CA, for Petitioner., Rebecca Hoffberg Phillips, Esquire, Trial, Ada Elsie Bosque, Senior Litigation Counsel, Oil, Matthew Allan Spurlock, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Opinion

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 31 2016 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JORGE ESPINOZA-LUGO, AKA Jorge No. 12-72465 Espinoza, AKA Jorge Espinosa Lugo, AKA Jorge Espinoza Lugo, Agency No. A046-990-134 Petitioner, MEMORANDUM* v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued November 21, 2014 Submitted December 30, 2014 San Francisco, California Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, CHRISTEN, Circuit Judge, and SEABRIGHT,** District Judge.

Jorge Espinoza-Lugo, native and citizen of Mexico, was convicted of accessory to a felony under California Penal Code § 32. An Immigration Judge * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ordered him removed to Mexico, determining his conviction to be an aggravated felony because it is an offense relating to obstruction of justice under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(S). Applying the interpretation of “obstruction of justice” articulated in In re Valenzuela Gallardo, 25 I. & N. Dec. 838 (BIA 2012), the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed Espinoza-Lugo’s appeal. Espinoza-Lugo now petitions for review.1 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D). In light of our decision in Valenzuela Gallardo v. Lynch, No. 12-72326, we remand to the Board for either application of the agency interpretation announced in In re Espinoza Gonzalez, 22 I. & N. Dec. 889 (BIA 1999), or consideration of a new construction of 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(S).

PETITION GRANTED IN PART, AND REMANDED.

FILED Espinoza-Lugo v. Lynch, No. 12-72465 MAR 31 2016 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS SEABRIGHT, District Judge, dissenting: I respectfully dissent for the reasons stated in my dissent from the majority Opinion in Valenzuela Gallardo v. Lynch, No. 12-72326.

* The Honorable J. Michael Seabright, District Judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii, sitting by designation. 1 The parties are familiar with the facts, so we do not recount them in detail.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.