Adous v. Keisler
This text of 250 F. App'x 563 (Adous v. Keisler) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Ibrahim Abdosh Adous, a native and citizen of Ethiopia, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) affirming the immigration judge’s order denying Adous’ application for relief under former section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c). For the reasons discussed below, we deny the petition for review.
Adous was convicted of assault and battery of a family member under Va.Code § 18.2-57.2. He contends that because battery does not require bodily injury or intent to inflict bodily injury under Virginia law, his crime is not one of moral turpitude. It is unnecessary for us to resolve this point, however, because Adous was not convicted merely of battery. Rather, he was convicted of assault and battery pursuant to a statute that has been construed to require an intent to inflict bodily injury on the victim. See Leal v. Commonwealth, 37 Va.App. 525, 559 S.E.2d *564 874, 878 (2002), rev’d on other grounds, Commonwealth v. Leal, 265 Va. 142, 574 S.E.2d 285 (2003). Adous’ failure to successfully inflict the harm he intended does not lessen the weight given to his crime. Accordingly, we deny the petition for review on the reasoning provided by the Board. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
250 F. App'x 563, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adous-v-keisler-ca4-2007.