Quinonez-Orozco v. Mukasey
This text of 270 F. App'x 527 (Quinonez-Orozco v. Mukasey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Petitioner seeks review of the denial of his application for cancellation of removal, arguing that the Immigration Judge and Board of Immigration Appeals incorrectly determined his conviction for dealing in counterfeit obligations or securities in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 4731 to be an “offense relating to ... counterfeiting” and therefore an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(R).
This case is similar to Albillo-Figueroa v. INS, 221 F.3d 1070 (9th Cir.2000), which held that a conviction for possession of counterfeit obligations in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 4722 is an “offense relating to counterfeiting” and therefore an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(R). Both 18 U.S.C. § 472 and its sister provision, 18 U.S.C. § 473, require an intent to defraud3 and are indisputably crimes “re[528]*528lating to” counterfeiting. As Albillo-Fi-gueroa reasoned, to hold otherwise would “read the term ‘relating to’ out of section 1101(a)(43)(R).” Albillo-Figueroa, 221 F.3d at 1073.
PETITION DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
270 F. App'x 527, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/quinonez-orozco-v-mukasey-ca9-2008.