Dong Kim v. Eric Holder, Jr.

428 F. App'x 485
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedJune 17, 2011
Docket10-60714
StatusUnpublished

This text of 428 F. App'x 485 (Dong Kim v. Eric Holder, Jr.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dong Kim v. Eric Holder, Jr., 428 F. App'x 485 (5th Cir. 2011).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

South Korean native and citizen Dong Choi Kim petitions this court for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) concluding that he was removable because his conviction for making a false statement on an income tax return in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7206(1) qualified as an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii) and 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(M). Kim concedes that a § 7206(1) offense may qualify as an aggravated felony for immigration purposes, but he contends that the Government failed to carry its burden of proving that his § 7206(1) offense involved a loss of more than $10,000. Our review of the record controverts this assertion.

The record contains the indictment and judgment for Kim’s offense, which establish that the actual loss was $54,232. Because the indictment charged both Kim and his wife, Kim contends that the government has failed to establish the amount of the loss that is attributable solely to Kim. However, spouses who file a joint tax return, such as Kim and his wife, are jointly and severally liable. See 26 U.S.C. § 6013(d)(3); Cheshire v. Comm’r of Inter *486 nal Revenue, 282 F.3d 326, 331 (5th Cir. 2002). So the entire amount is attributable to Kim. The indictment and judgment constitute “reasonable, substantial, and probative evidence” and show that the Government has established Kim’s removability by clear and convincing evidence. See Arguelles-Olivares v. Mukasey, 526 F.3d 171, 178 (5th Cir.2008). The petition for review is DENIED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under Has. limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Arguelles-Olivares v. Mukasey
526 F.3d 171 (Fifth Circuit, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
428 F. App'x 485, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dong-kim-v-eric-holder-jr-ca5-2011.