Siskind Susser

Green Card LotteryABCs of ImmigrationHiring A LawyerHealth Care Info CenterImmigration SitesFashion, Arts & / Sports Newsletter

Siskind Immigration Bulletin Request Consultation Ask Visalaw Client Login
About the Firm
Our Offices
Our Team
In the News
Practice Areas and Services
Scheduling a Consultation
ABCs of Immigration
Requests For Proposals
Press Room


 
Immigration Forms
Government Processing Times
State Department Visa Bulletin
Siskind's Immigration Professional
Working in America
Washington Updates
Publications
The Visalaw Blog

MEMBER OF THE
AMERICAN
IMMIGRATION
LAWYERS
ASSOCIATION


LAUNCH CHAT

< back

News from the Courts

Burke v. Mukasey, (5th Cir. Dec. 10, 2007)

A conviction for third-degree criminal possession of stolen property under NY Penal Law §165.50 is an aggravated felony theft offense under INA §101(a)(43)(G).

Petitioner was convicted of criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree in violation of NY Penal Law §165.50. The immigration judge found Petitioner removable as a result of his conviction for an aggravated felony under INA §101(a)(43)(G). The BIA affirmed.

Under NY Penal Law §165.50,

[a] person is guilty of criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree when he knowingly possesses stolen property, with intent to benefit himself or a person other than an owner thereof or to impede the recovery by an owner thereof, and when the value of the property exceeds three thousand dollars.

Under INA §101(a)(43)(G), "a theft offense (including receipt of stolen property)" is an aggravated felony. In Hernandez-Mancilla v. INS, 246 F.3d 1002, 1009 (7th Cir. 2001), the Seventh Circuit found that the "modern, generic and broad definition" of §101(a)(43) includes "a taking of property or an exercise of control over property without consent with the criminal intent to deprive the owner of rights and benefits of ownership, even if such deprivation is less than total or permanent." See also United States v. Corona-Sanchez, 291 F.3d 1201, 1205 (9th Cir. 2002) (en banc); United States v. Vasquez-Flores, 265 F.3d 1122, 1125 (10th Cir. 2001). The court formally adopted this interpretation and found that the elements necessary for conviction under NY Penal Code §165.50 "plainly fall within the generic definition used in [INA §101(a)(43)(G)]."

The court explained that similar to the generic definition, "possess" under New York law means "to have physical possession or otherwise to exercise dominion or control over tangible property." Moreover, under both the generic definition and the New York statute, there must be an intent to deprive the owner of the benefit proceeding from possession of the stolen goods. Therefore, the court held that a conviction under NY Penal Law §165.50 constitutes an aggravated felony theft offense under INA §101(a)(43)(G).

 

 

< Back | Index | Next >

 

Print This Page

Disclaimer: This newsletter is provided as a public service and not intended to establish an attorney client relationship. Any reliance on information contained herein is taken at your own risk.

Siskind Susser
1028 Oakhaven Rd.
Memphis, TN 38119
T. 800-343-4890 or 901-682-6455
F. 901-682-6394
Email: info@visalaw.com

Home | Immigration Bulletin | Green Card Lottery Center | ABCs of Immigration | Hiring A Lawyer
Hot Topics | Health Care Info Center | Immigration Sites | Search



This is an advertisement. Certification as an Immigration Specialist is not currently available in Tennessee. Siskind Susser limits its practice strictly to immigration law, a Federal practice area, and we do not claim expertise in the laws of states other than where our attorneys are licensed. Siskind Susser does not retain clients on the strength of advertising materials alone but only after following our own engagement procedures (e.g. interviews, conflict checks, retainer agreements). The information contained on this site is intended to educate members of the public generally and is not intended to provide solutions to individual problems. Readers are cautioned not to attempt to solve individual problems on the basis of information contained herein and are strongly advised to seek competent legal counsel before relying on information on this site. Siskind Susser and its advertisers are independent of each other and advertisers on this site are not being endorsed by Siskind Susser by virtue of the fact that they appear on this page. Site is maintained by Siskind Susser's Memphis, TN office and overseen by Gregory Siskind. Copyright © 2003-2008 Siskind Susser. All rights reserved.