Ruiz v. Mukasey

Fifth Circuit

Ruiz v. Mukasey

296 F. App'x 429

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedOctober 21, 2008

Docket05-60783

StatusUnpublished

This text of 296 F. App'x 429 (Ruiz v. Mukasey) 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

Ruiz v. Mukasey, 296 F. App'x 429 (5th Cir. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Lucia Lopez de Ruiz (Ruiz) seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) rejecting her claim for relief under former § 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The BIA concluded that Ruiz’s prior conviction for fraud did not have a statutory counterpart in § 212(a), relying on 8 C.F.R. § 1212.3(f)(5), and In re Blake, 23 I. & N. Dec. 722 (BIA 2005), petition for review granted & remanded, Blake v. Carbone, 489 F.3d 88, 91 (2d Cir.2007). Ruiz argues that ' Blake and its interpretation of § 1212.3(f)(5) is incompatible with INS v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289, 121 S.Ct. 2271, 150 L.Ed.2d 347 (2001); violates the constitutional doctrines of equal protection, due process, and separation of powers; is inconsistent with statutory language and Supreme Court precedent; and is inconsistent with the BIA’s prior practice. She further challenges the determination that fraud is not a crime involving moral turpitude for purposes of § 212(c) relief.

In light of our decisions in Vo v. Gonzales, 482 F.3d 363 (5th Cir.2007), and Avilez-Granados v. Gonzales, 481 F.3d 869, 871-72 (5th Cir.2007), we reject Ruiz’s claims. 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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

PER CURIAM: *

Lucia Lopez de Ruiz (Ruiz) seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) rejecting her claim for relief under former § 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The BIA concluded that Ruiz’s prior conviction for fraud did not have a statutory counterpart in § 212(a), relying on 8 C.F.R. § 1212.3(f)(5), and In re Blake, 23 I. & N. Dec. 722 (BIA 2005), petition for review granted & remanded, Blake v. Carbone, 489 F.3d 88, 91 (2d Cir.2007). Ruiz argues that ' Blake and its interpretation of § 1212.3(f)(5) is incompatible with INS v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289, 121 S.Ct. 2271, 150 L.Ed.2d 347 (2001); violates the constitutional doctrines of equal protection, due process, and separation of powers; is inconsistent with statutory language and Supreme Court precedent; and is inconsistent with the BIA’s prior practice. She further challenges the determination that fraud is not a crime involving moral turpitude for purposes of § 212(c) relief.

In light of our decisions in Vo v. Gonzales, 482 F.3d 363 (5th Cir.2007), and Avilez-Granados v. Gonzales, 481 F.3d 869, 871-72 (5th Cir.2007), we reject Ruiz’s claims. 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 the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

296 F. App'x 429, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ruiz-v-mukasey-ca5-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack