Hakim Hussein Kassim v. U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service

96 F.3d 1438, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 28766, 1996 WL 516148
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 12, 1996
Docket96-1206
StatusUnpublished

This text of 96 F.3d 1438 (Hakim Hussein Kassim v. U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service) 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.

Bluebook
Hakim Hussein Kassim v. U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service, 96 F.3d 1438, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 28766, 1996 WL 516148 (4th Cir. 1996).

Opinion

96 F.3d 1438

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Hakim Hussein KASSIM, Petitioner,
v.
U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.

No. 96-1206.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted July 30, 1996.
Decided Sept. 12, 1996.

Hakim Hussein Kassim, Petitioner Pro Se. David Michael McConnell, Richard Michael Evans, Anthony Wray Norwood, Christine Audrey Bither, John Thomas Lynch, Jr., UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

B.I.A.

AFFIRMED.

Before LUTTIG and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Hakim Hussein Kassim, a citizen and national of Somalia, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board). The Board dismissed his appeal from the decision of an Immigration Judge (IJ) finding Kassim deportable; denying his application for a waiver of deportability under § 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C.A. § 1182(c) (West Supp.1996); and denying his applications for asylum, 8 U.S.C.A. § 1158(a) (West Supp.1996), and withholding of deportation, 8 U.S.C.A. § 1253(h) (West Supp.1996). We have jurisdiction over Kassim's petition pursuant to 8 U.S.C.A. § 1105a(a) (West Supp.1996).

Kassim entered the United States as a student in November 1984. His father, a dissident Somali politician, joined the family in the United States in 1985. Kassim's father was granted asylum status, and Kassim received derived asylum status. He adjusted his status to Lawful Permanent Resident, effective October 3, 1987.

Kassim has had many convictions for driving while intoxicated. In 1992, he was arrested and charged with fondling the eleven-year-old son of a friend. He pled nolo contendere and was sentenced to six months imprisonment. In 1993, Kassim was charged with attempting to fraudulently obtain a credit card and travelers checks. While on bond, Kassim was arrested for driving while intoxicated. He was sentenced to eighteen months imprisonment on the latter charge and a two year suspended sentence with three years supervised probation for the credit card fraud. Kassim also admitted to several other arrests without convictions.

Kassim's father died in 1994. His mother lives in Canada, and his stepmother and seven siblings are naturalized American citizens. Kassim has attended a variety of schools, colleges, and community colleges, and has had several jobs. He has been in various alcohol rehabilitation programs.

In 1994, Kassim was ordered to show cause why he should not be deported on the grounds that he had been convicted of two crimes of moral turpitude not involving a single scheme or plan. 8 U.S.C.A. § 1251(a)(2)(A)(ii) (West Supp.1996). After a lengthy hearing, the IJ concluded that Kassim's deportability had been established based on his criminal history and admissions. Somalia was designated as the country of deportation.

Kassim sought three types of relief from deportation: asylum, withholding of deportation, and a discretionary waiver under § 212(c) of the Immigration Act, 8 U.S.C.A. § 1182(c). He presented evidence about his life and family. Kassim testified about the political and social unrest in Somalia, and his fears for his survival should he return there. Two of Kassim's brothers testified about the situation in Somalia and about their wish that Kassim could assume his role as head of the family.

The IJ found Kassim deportable under § 1251(a)(2)(A)(ii), holding that he had committed two or more crimes of moral turpitude not arising out of a single scheme or plan. The Board upheld this finding. Kassim challenges the holding that the sexual offense conviction was a crime of moral turpitude.

Whether a crime involves moral turpitude within the meaning of the Immigration Act is a legal issue we review de novo. We give "due deference to the BIA's interpretation of the deportation statute," Cabral v. I.N.S., 15 F.3d 193, 194 (1st Cir.1994), provided it is based on a permissible construction of the statute. Akindemowo v. I.N.S., 61 F.3d 282, 284 (4th Cir.1995). Congress did not define a "crime involving moral turpitude," leaving the phrase to administrative and judicial interpretation. Cabral, 15 F.3d at 195. The Board looks to the elements of the crime rather than to the facts surrounding each crime. Franklin v. I.N.S., 72 F.3d 571, 572 (8th Cir.1995)

As the IJ noted, we held a crime involving Md. Ann.Code art. 27, § 464 (1976), a predecessor statute to Md. Ann.Code art. 27, § 464B (1994), to be manifestly a crime of moral turpitude. Castle v. I.N.S., 541 F.2d 1064, 1066 (4th Cir.1976). We uphold the ruling of the IJ and the Board that this reprehensible and immoral act involving a child does involve moral turpitude. Therefore, the IJ properly found Kassim deportable under § 1251(a)(2)(A)(ii).

Kassim requested withholding of deportation under 8 U.S.C.A. § 1253(h)(1), and asylum under 8 U.S.C.A. § 1158(a). The withholding provision is not applicable if the alien "having been convicted ... of a particularly serious crime, constitutes a danger to the community of the United States." 8 U.S.C.A. § 1253(2)(B) (West Supp.1996); 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(2)(ii) (1995). Likewise, asylum is not available if the alien has been convicted of a particularly serious crime and is therefore a danger to the community of the United States. 8 C.F.R. § 208.14(d)(1) (1995). If an applicant has been convicted of a particularly serious crime, then he is presumed to be a danger to the community. Kofa v. I.N.S., 60 F.3d 1084, 1088-89 (4th Cir.1995) (in banc).

The IJ properly analyzed the circumstances of the sexual offense to determine that this was a particularly serious crime. The crime was one against a person rather than property, indeed against a child, with substantial risk of coercion and violence. The IJ found that the sexual offense would cause long-lasting psychological injury. The Board affirmed this holding on the reasoning of the IJ, and held that Kassim's drunkenness did not excuse its seriousness. Giving due deference to the agency's interpretation of the statute, Akindemowo, 61 F.3d at 284-85, we uphold this ruling. Kassim was therefore ineligible for either asylum or withholding of deportation.

Kassim also appeals the Board's denial of his application for a discretionary waiver of deportation under § 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c).

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
96 F.3d 1438, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 28766, 1996 WL 516148, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hakim-hussein-kassim-v-us-immigration-naturalization-service-ca4-1996.