Background
Margarito Ramirez-Aguilar, a native and citizen of Mexico, was a lawful permanent resident until he was convicted in Florida state court in January two thousand twenty-three of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and possession of a firearm with an altered serial number. He was sentenced to two years of community control under the supervision of the Florida Department of Corrections. In May two thousand twenty-four, the Department of Homeland Security issued a Notice to Appear asserting he was removable under the Immigration and Nationality Act for having been convicted of a removable firearms offense and an aggravated felony. The immigration judge found the conviction met the definition of an aggravated felony because it was a crime of violence for which he was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of at least one year. The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed, concluding the community control sentence constituted a term of imprisonment due to the restrictions on liberty.
The court’s reasoning
The court held that Ramirez-Aguilar’s argument is foreclosed by the Eleventh Circuit’s prior decision in Herrera v. United States Attorney General. In Herrera, the court determined that house arrest constitutes a term of imprisonment under the Immigration and Nationality Act. The court found that Florida community control is defined by state law as a form of intensive, supervised custody and is a form of in-house arrest. Because the petitioner’s sentence confined him to his residence except for approved activities, it falls under the holding of Herrera. The court further clarified that the holding in Herrera regarding house arrest is binding precedent and not dicta, as the analysis was necessary to reach the conclusion. The court also rejected the argument that the Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo undermines Herrera, noting that Loper Bright did not call into question prior cases relying on the Chevron framework and that Herrera relied on ordinary tools of statutory construction.
Because of Florida’s legal definition of community control, and this Court’s interpretation of community control, Ramirez-Aguilar’s sentence of two years of community control is subject to Herrera’s holding that house arrest constitutes a term of imprisonment under the INA.
Margarito Ramirez-Aguilar v. U.S. Attorney General, 25-12222 (11th Cir. May 28, 2026)
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces that non-custodial sentences involving significant restrictions on liberty, such as community control or house arrest, will be treated as terms of imprisonment for immigration purposes, rendering aliens ineligible for cancellation of removal if the underlying offense is a crime of violence.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download