Antonio Perez Ramirez v. Eric Holder, Jr.

562 F. App'x 555

Opinions

MEMORANDUM

**

Antonio Perez Ramirez (“Perez Ramirez”) petitions for review from a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) finding him removable as an alien convicted of an aggravated felony. Matter of Perez Ramirez, 25 I. & N. Dec. 203, 208 (BIA 2010). We lack jurisdiction to review the final order of removal based on Perez Ramirez’s conviction for an aggravated felony, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C), but we “have jurisdiction to determine as a matter of law whether [his] conviction constitutes an aggravated felony” rendering him removable. Prakash v. Holder, 579 F.3d 1033, 1035 (9th Cir.2009). We deny the petition.

The BIA did not err in finding Perez Ramirez removable.

First, his “conviction under California Penal Code [Section] 273.5(a) is a categorical crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. [Section] 16(a)[.]” Banuelos-Ayon v. Holder, 611 F.3d 1080, 1086 (9th Cir.2010); see also United States v. Ayala-Nicanor, 659 F.3d 744, 752 (9th Cir.2011) (reaffirming Banuelos-Ayon).

Second, his conviction was accompanied by a term of imprisonment of at least one year. The Immigration and Nationality Act unambiguously defines “term of imprisonment” in the context of this case. 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(48)(B) (“Any reference to a term of imprisonment or a sentence with respect to an offense is deemed to include the period of incarceration or confinement ordered by a court of law regardless of any suspension of the imposition or execution of that imprisonment or sentence in whole or in part.”). Here, when Perez Ramirez pled guilty to violating Section 273.5(a), the superior court suspended imposition of sentence and placed him on probation. The superior court subsequently revoked probation and imposed a 365-day jail term under Section 273.5(a). The imposition of a jail term following an original suspension of sentence is clearly contemplated by “term of imprisonment” as defined in 8 U.S.C. Section 1101(a)(48)(B).

DENIED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.