The statute includes as an aggravated felony “an offense that — (i) involves fraud or deceit in which the loss to the victim or victims exceeds $10,000 . . . .”[603]  Statutory changes in 1996 reduced the amount of monetary loss to the victim(s) required to trigger a finding that a fraud or deceit conviction was an aggravated felony, from $200,000 to $10,000.[604]  This change is retroactive.[605]  The nature of the offense is discussed in § 7.81, infra, and the requirement of loss to the victim is discussed in § 7.82, infra.

[603] INA § 101(a)(43)(M)(i), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(M)(i).

[604] See Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (“IIRAIRA”), Division C of Pub. L. No. 104-208, § 321(a)(7), 110 Stat. 3009-546, 3009-628 (enacted Sept. 30, 1996); Matter of Ayala-Arevalo, 22 I. & N. Dec. 398, n.1 (BIA 1998).

[605] See IIRAIRA § 321(b).

AGGRAVATED FELONY - FORGERY - DOCUMENT FORGERY
Vizcarra-Ayala v. Mukasey, __ F.3d __, 2008 WL 184954 (9th Cir. Jan. 23, 2008) (California conviction for violation of California Penal Code 475(c) is not categorically an aggravated felony offense "related to" forgery, because the statute encompasses real, unaltered documents, and thus falls outside the generic definition of "forgery" applied to the aggravated felony category).

AGGRAVATED FELONY - FORGERY - DEFINED
Vizcarra-Ayala v. Mukasey, __ F.3d __, 2008 WL 184954 (9th Cir. Jan. 23, 2008) ("an essential element of the generic offense of forgery is the false making or alteration of a document, such that the document is not what it purports to be."; thus the offense of using a genuine instrument with intent to defraud is not "forgery").

Ninth Circuit

FIREARMS OFFENSE " ANTIQUE FIREARMS DEFENSE TO REMOVAL " OPEN QUESTION IN NINTH CIRCUIT
Pagayon v. Holder, ___ F.3d ___, 2011 WL 2508239 (9th Cir. Jun. 24, 2011) (per curiam) (California conviction of violating Penal Code 12021(a)(1), possession of firearms by felons and drug addicts, is not categorically a deportable firearms conviction, under INA 237(a)(2)(C), 8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(2)(C), because the record of conviction does not show that he was convicted of possessing a non-antique firearm that fell within the federal definition of firearm: As noted, we leave for another day whether such proof is required to establish removability based on a conviction under Cal. Penal Code 12021(a)(1).).

AGGRAVATED FELONY - FORGERY
Bobb v. Atty Gen. of the United States, __ F.3d __ (9th Cir. Aug. 3, 2006) (to constitute aggravated felony "forgery" under INA 101(a)(43)(R) the offense must be "related to" forgery, i.e., show or establish a logical connection with forgery; a forgery offense does not necessarily require proof of an intent to defraud; 18 U.S.C. 510(b) [exchange of forged Treasury instruments] given as example of a forgery offense that is "related to" forgery, but does not involve fraud), following Drakes v. Zimski, 240 F.3d 246 (3d Cir. 2001). http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/3rd/052891p.pdf

AGGRAVATED FELONY - FORGERY - GENERIC DEFINITION
Morales-Alegria v. Gonzales, ___ F.3d ___, 2006 WL 1529033 (9th Cir. Jun. 6, 2006) (California conviction of forgery under California Penal Code 476 constitutes an "offense relating to...forgery" under INA 101(a)(43)(R), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(R), for purposes of qualifying as an "aggravated felony" to trigger removal, since it requires the knowledge of the fictitious nature of the instrument required to meet the mens rea requirement for the generic aggravated felony definition of an "offense relating to . . forgery"). http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/0373117p.pdf