Post-Conviction Relief for Immigrants



 
 

§ 7.68 2. Immigration-Related Grounds

 
Skip to § 7.

For more text, click "Next Page>"

In Matter of Pickering,[196] the BIA interpreted INA § 101(a)(48)(A), the statutory definition of conviction.  The question of what constitutes a sentence, however, is determined under completely different statutes.[197]  Pickering confronted an order vacating a conviction, not an order reducing a sentence, and therefore did not alter the law with respect to sentences.[198]

            As a result, vacating a sentence in order to eliminate it for immigration purposes, or on an immigration-related ground, will be as effective as to do so on any other ground.


[196] Matter of Pickering, 23 I. & N. Dec. 621 (BIA June 11, 2003) (conviction must be vacated on ground of legal invalidity existing at the time the conviction arose, as opposed to rehabilitative or immigration purposes, for its immigration effects to be eliminated).

[197] E.g., INA § 101(a)(48)(B), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(48)(B) (statutory definition of sentence); INA § 101(a)(43)(F), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(F), et al. [“sentence imposed” requirement for various aggravated felonies].

[198] See R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377, 112 S.Ct. 2538, 2545, n.5, 120 L.Ed.2d 305 (1992) [“It is of course contrary to all traditions of our jurisprudence to consider the law on [a] point conclusively resolved by broad language in cases where the issue was not presented or even envisioned”]; United States v. Vroman, 975 F.2d 669, 672 (9th Cir. 1992) (precedent not controlling on issue not presented to prior panel), cert. denied, 507 U.S. 996, 113 S.Ct. 1611, 123 L.Ed.2d 172 (1993).

 

TRANSLATE