Morgan-White v. Holder

Fifth Circuit

Morgan-White v. Holder

356 F. App'x 700

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedDecember 15, 2009

Docket08-60586

StatusUnpublished

This text of 356 F. App'x 700 (Morgan-White v. Holder) 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

Morgan-White v. Holder, 356 F. App'x 700 (5th Cir. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Barrington Berton Morgan-White petitions this court for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal and affirming the immigration judge’s order that Morgan-White is ineligible for cancellation of removal pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a) because he committed an aggravated felony. In August 2007, Morgan-White was convicted for possession of less than one gram of cocaine in violation of Texas law. Though Morgan-White was convicted in 2006 for attempted possession of a controlled substance, a misdemeanor, he was not prosecuted under the Texas recidivist statute. 1

Morgan-White contends the Board improperly characterized his 2007 Texas *701 conviction for cocaine possession as an aggravated felony punishable under the Controlled Substances Act 2 because he was neither prosecuted nor convicted under a relevant federal or state recidivist offender statute. He argues the Board should not have followed the hypothetical approach used by this court in United States v. Sanchez-Villalobos 3 because that case is inconsistent with prior precedent of this court. Morgan-White also argues that the Board’s analysis in In re Cara-clmri-Rosendo 4 is entitled to some deference and that the rule of lenity should be applied in favor of Morgan-White. Morgan-White’s arguments are foreclosed by our decision in Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder 5 and accordingly, Morgan-White’s 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

1

. Tex. Pen Code §§ 12.42 & 12.43.

2

. 21 U.S.C. § 844(a).

3

. 412 F.3d 572 (5th Cir.2005).

4

. 24 I. & N. Dec. 382 (BIA 2007).

5

. 570 F.3d 263 (5th Cir.2009), cert. denied -U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 1012, - L.Ed.2d - (2009).

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

PER CURIAM: *

Barrington Berton Morgan-White petitions this court for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal and affirming the immigration judge’s order that Morgan-White is ineligible for cancellation of removal pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a) because he committed an aggravated felony. In August 2007, Morgan-White was convicted for possession of less than one gram of cocaine in violation of Texas law. Though Morgan-White was convicted in 2006 for attempted possession of a controlled substance, a misdemeanor, he was not prosecuted under the Texas recidivist statute. 1

Morgan-White contends the Board improperly characterized his 2007 Texas *701 conviction for cocaine possession as an aggravated felony punishable under the Controlled Substances Act 2 because he was neither prosecuted nor convicted under a relevant federal or state recidivist offender statute. He argues the Board should not have followed the hypothetical approach used by this court in United States v. Sanchez-Villalobos 3 because that case is inconsistent with prior precedent of this court. Morgan-White also argues that the Board’s analysis in In re Cara-clmri-Rosendo 4 is entitled to some deference and that the rule of lenity should be applied in favor of Morgan-White. Morgan-White’s arguments are foreclosed by our decision in Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder 5 and accordingly, Morgan-White’s 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 the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

1

. Tex. Pen Code §§ 12.42 & 12.43.

2

. 21 U.S.C. § 844(a).

3

. 412 F.3d 572 (5th Cir.2005).

4

. 24 I. & N. Dec. 382 (BIA 2007).

5

. 570 F.3d 263 (5th Cir.2009), cert. denied -U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 1012, - L.Ed.2d - (2009).