Criminal Defense of Immigrants


§ 21.23 (C)

Skip to § 21.

For more text, click "Next Page>"

(C)  “Reason to Believe.”  Transportation does not necessarily implicate drug trafficking,[201] and therefore a conviction should not trigger this ground of inadmissibility unless the record of conviction shows the transportation was for sale or distribution.  Remember, however, that this is a conduct based ground, and the noncitizen may be inadmissible if s/he in fact engaged in drug trafficking.[202]


[201] See United States v. Almazan-Becerra, 456 F.3d 949 (9th Cir. Aug. 1, 2006) (California conviction of transportation of methamphetamines, in violation of Health & Safety Code § 11379(a), did not constitute a drug trafficking conviction for purposes of triggering a 12-level enhancement of illegal re-entry sentence under USSG § 2L1.2(b)(1)(B), because transportation can be committed for personal use only, and there is no commercial element to the conviction); United States v. Casarez-Bravo, 181 F.3d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1999) (conviction of transportation of marijuana under California Health & Safety Code § 11360 cannot serve as a career offender predicate conviction, and is not an aggravated felony, because it can be committed for personal use).  See also United States v. Navidad-Marcos, 367 F.3d 903, 908 (9th Cir. 2004); United States v. Rivera-Sanchez, 247 F.3d 905, 908-909 (9th Cir. 2001)

[202] See § 21.6, supra.