Crimes of Moral Turpitude

(A)

In General.  A formal conviction of one CMT will trigger inadmissibility.[22]  As discussed in § § 2.3-2.4, supra, only certain dispositions are considered to be “convictions” for immigration purposes.  Diversion (if no plea of guilty or no contest has been entered),[23] dispositions in juvenile proceedings,[24] and a conviction that is still on direct appeal do not constitute convictions.  Deferred entry of judgment, and similar dispositions, that follow a plea of guilty or no contest, constitute convictions for immigration purposes, even if no conviction results under state law.[25] See generally N. Tooby & J.J. Rollin, Criminal Defense of Immigrants Chapter 7 (4th ed. 2007).

[22] INA § 101(a)(48)(A), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(48)(A).

[23] Some “diversion” programs, however, require a guilty plea to be entered. E.g., California Penal Code § 1000 as amended effective Jan. 1, 1997, requiring a guilty plea.  These dispositions constitute a conviction for immigration purposes even after dismissal.  Matter of Punu, 22 I. & N. Dec. 224 (BIA 1998) (en banc).

[24] Matter of Ramirez-Rivero, 18 I. & N. Dec.135 (BIA 1981); Matter of CM, 5 I. & N. Dec. 327 (BIA 1953) (juvenile finding of commission of crime involving moral turpitude does not constitute a “conviction” or trigger inadmissibility).

[25] Matter of Punu, 22 I. & N. Dec. 224 (BIA 1998) (en banc).