(A)  Aggravated Felonies.

            Other motor vehicle offenses may fall within the aggravated felony crime of violence definition,[201] or other categories of aggravated felony, depending on the elements of the crime.

 

Third Circuit:

 

Francis v. Reno, 269 F.3d 162 (3d Cir. Oct. 16, 2001) (Pennsylvania conviction of vehicular homicide in violation of 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3732, did not constitute an aggravated felony under INA § 101(a)(43)(F), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(F), since misdemeanor vehicular homicide was not a “felony” under the INA, and even if conviction could be converted into felony, it did not involve a substantial risk of physical force required to make it an “aggravated felony.”).

 

Fifth Circuit:

 

United States v. Rodriquez-Rodriguez, 388 F.3d 466 (5th Cir. Oct. 15, 2004) (Texas Penal Code § 31.07(a), unauthorized use of a motor vehicle is not a crime of violence for illegal re-entry sentencing purposes since the statute does not require, as an element, the use of force).

 

United States v. Rodriguez-Rodriguez, 323 F.3d 317 (5th Cir. Feb 27, 2003) (Texas conviction of unauthorized use of a motor vehicle, in violation of Texas Penal Code Ann. § 30.02(a) (West Supp. 2003), is not a crime of violence within the meaning of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) because the offense is not listed in Application Note 1(B)(ii)(II) and does not have as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of another).

 

Seventh Circuit:

 

Bazan-Reyes v. INS, 256 F.3d 600 (7th Cir. July 5, 2001) (Wisconsin conviction for homicide by intoxicated use of vehicle, in violation of Wis.St.1996, § 940.09, was not an aggravated felony “crime of violence” under INA § 101(a)(43)(F), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(F), for deportation purposes, since offense required that offender actually hit someone, but did not require that he intentionally use force to achieve that result).

Ninth Circuit:

 

Penuliar v. Ashcroft, 395 F.3d 1037 (9th Cir. Jan. 12, 2005) (California conviction of unlawful driving or taking a vehicle, in violation of Vehicle Code § 10851(a), was not a theft offense, within the meaning of INA § 101(a)(43)(G), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(G), because the statute and charge both were overbroad with respect to the definition of a theft offense by encompassing not only substantive theft offenses but aiding and abetting them as well).

[201] INA § 101(a)(43)(F), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(F).  See N. Tooby, Aggravated Felonies § § 5.13-5.15 (2003).

AGGRAVATED FELONY - CRIME OF VIOLENCE - AUTO THEFT
Nguyen v. Holder, 571 F.3d 524 (6th Cir. Jul. 2, 2009) (California conviction of auto theft, in violation of what is now codified at Penal Code 487(d)(i) (any person who (1) takes possession; (2) of an automobile; (3) owned or possessed by another; (4) by means of trespass and (5) with intent to permanently deprive the owner of such property; and (6) carries the automobile away), does not constitute a "crime of violence" under 18 U.S.C. 16(b), and is therefore not an aggravated felony under INA 101(a)(43)(F), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(F), for purposes of rendering the defendant deportable, because the theft offense does not by its nature, involve a "substantial risk" that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense).

Ninth Circuit

CRIMES OF MORAL TURPITUDE " HIT AND RUN
Conejo Bravo v. Sessions, 875 F.3d 890 (9th Cir. Nov.17, 2017) (California conviction of hit and run, under Vehicle Code 20001(a), is under a divisible statute; the record established that noncitizen failed to render aid, which is a crime of moral turpitude); see Garcia-Maldonado v. Gonzales, 491 F.3d 284, 290 (5th Cir. 2007) (holding that Texas hit and run law qualifies as a CIMT, as "the failure to stop and render aid after being involved in an automobile accident is the type of base behavior that reflects moral turpitude").

AGGRAVATED FELONY - THEFT - JOYRIDING
Penuliar v. Ashcroft, 528 F.3d 603 (9th Cir. Jun. 10, 2008) (California conviction for violation of California Vehicle Code 10851, unlawful driving of a motor vehicle, is not categorically an aggravated felony "theft" offense for immigration purposes, since that statutes includes accessories after the fact), following United States v. Vidal, 504 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. 2007)

AGGRAVATED FELONY - THEFT OFFENSE - UNAUTHORIZED DRIVING
United States v. Vidal, 504 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. Oct. 10, 2007) (9-6 en banc) (California conviction for unlawful driving or taking of vehicle, under Penal Code 10851(a), did not categorically qualify as an aggravated felony theft offense under INA 101(a)(43)(G), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(G) for purposes of enhancement of illegal reentry sentence, since the offense includes accessory after the fact, which is not listed in INA 101(a)(43)(U), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(G) as an aggravated felony inchoate offense).