Background
Christian Lopez, a native of Mexico, was convicted of four counts of petit larceny under the Reno Municipal Code and one felony weapons charge. Following his release from prison, he was placed in removal proceedings. The immigration judge found him removable for committing two or more crimes involving moral turpitude not arising from a single scheme and denied his applications for asylum and withholding of removal. The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed these decisions.
The court’s reasoning
The panel reviewed the case de novo following Loper Bright Enterprises, applying Skidmore deference to the BIA’s interpretation in Matter of Diaz-Lizarraga. The court concluded that the Reno Municipal Code ordinance categorically defines a crime involving moral turpitude because the term deprive is understood to mean withholding property permanently or for a duration that substantially erodes its value. The court rejected the argument that the unavailability of a pardon for municipal offenses precludes removal, finding the plain language of the statute requires only that a pardon be granted, not that one be available. Finally, the court held that the four distinct larceny convictions did not constitute a single scheme of criminal misconduct under existing precedent.
The dissent
The majority errs by reaching for an interpretation not found in the text of the ordinance or any decision by a Nevada state court.
Gabriel P. Sanchez
What it means going forward
The decision clarifies that petty municipal larceny convictions can serve as a basis for removal if they meet the revised BIA standard for crimes involving moral turpitude. It also establishes that the lack of a pardon mechanism for minor offenses does not immunize noncitizens from deportation under the pardon waiver provision.