Hamid Choudhry, A073 538 314 (BIA Sept. 4, 2013)

7/29/2019 Hamid Choudhry, A073 538 314 (BIA Sept. 4, 2013)

1/13

Griin, Thomas M., EsqSuin & Gin P.C.3 Cestut Stee Sute 3Philadelpha, PA9

Name: CHOUDRY, HAMID

US Deparen o uie

cutiv c r Iigron Rv

Board ofImmigration Appealsce of he Cerk

507 Leburg Pike, Sute 2000Fls Chch Vin 2204

S LITork Co PsoO3 Concod RoadYo PA 7

A73383

Dae of ts oice 9//3

nclos is copy o h os cision n or n th bovrrnc cs

nclosur

Mms:Pale Roer

Sncrly

D ctonn

h rk

yungcUsm: Doket

Cite as: Hamid Choudhry, A073 538 314 (BIA Sept. 4, 2013)

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished


2/13

US Departmet of Jutice Execve Oe r an Reew

I

Fa C, Vgna4

Fi: 073 538 314 Yor, PA

Decn f e ad fa Aeal

:SEP - 4 2013

In re: HAMI COUDRY aka. Muhamad Hamidaka. Hamit Choudhry

REMOVL PROCEEGS

AE

ON EHLF O RESPOENT Thoms M. Esqir

O EHLF O HS Willi E LorSnior Aoy

CHARGE:

oic: Sc. 237()(2)()(iii), I& c [8 U.SC. 1227()()(A)(iii)] -Convicd o gvd ony (s dnd in scion 10l ()(43)())

Sc 237()(2)()(iii), IN c 8 SC 1227()()()(iii)] -Convicd o gvd lony (s dnd in scion 10l()(43)())

Lodgd Sc 237()(2)(A)(ii), &N c 8 U.S.C 1227()()()(ii)] Convicd o wo or mor crims involving morl uriud

LICTON Tinion

Th rsondn, lw n rsidn o h nid Ss, is niv nd ciizn oPkisn. Th rmn o omnd Scury (HS"), ls h Aril 4, 203, dcisiono h Immiion Judg rmining hs rocdings. Th wll b dismissd.

On Jly 13, 201, h rsondn w convicd o md Obsrucing Govndminisrion in h Scond gr in violion o Nw Yor Pna w 11000 nd 95 05(.J Exh. 2, Tb F) Subsquny, on Ocobr 3, 202, h rsondn wconvicd o Consircy o Sl Conrbnd Cigrs in violion o 18 U.SC 371

(J 1 Exh 2, Tb C). Th HS ssrs h 202 convicion is r n ggrvd ony,o wi, consircy ons involving ud or dci in which h loss o h vicim xcdd$JO,OOO. ee scions 10l()(43)(M) d ) o h Immiion ionliy Ac, SC. 1101()(43)(M) nd (U). Th HS hus rgus h h Immigrion Judg d indismissing h chrg o rmovbiiy undr scion 237()()(A)(iii) o h c, 8 USC. 1227()()(A)(iii) (J. 4-5) n ddiion, h HS clims h h rsondns convicionsr r crims invoving mor uriud (CIMT") no rising ou o h s schm ocriminl misconduc Thrr, h HS connds h h iion Judg d indismissing h chrg o rmovbiliy ursu o scion 37()(2)(A)(ii) o h c



3/13

05

The HS bes te buren of provng removability by cle an convincng evience.CFR. 0 The eteination of whether an alien's convicton is r an agavatelony entas appication of the categorica approach articuate in Tayor v U 95 U.S 55990 Borrome v Aorey Geera of 6 F.3 50 55 (3 Cir. 0 ikewiseecing whete a conviction is a CMT eques applcaton of the categorica approachJeaLo v Aoey Geera of 5 F3 6 (3d Cir. 009 (declining to defer toMaer of vaTrevo &N ec 6 (AG 00 Ths involves lookng to the elementsof the stautory oense ( not the aen's conduct to ascen the least cupabe conducthyoheticaly necessa to sustan a conviction Par v Aoey Geera of F3 0 (3d Ci. 005

e statute er whch the responent was convicte n 0 provdes

f wo o more persons conspie to commit any oense aganst the United Statesor to deau the Unte States or any agency thereof in any manner or anypuose d one or moe of such persons o any act to eect the object of the

conspiracy each sha be ne uner ths ttle or mprsone not more than veyears or both

U.SC (empass adde he Imiation Juge coecty un that this stauteis divisible because it ists potental eements n the alteative (J at ee Deampv Ued ae S.Ct 6 0; Ued ae v Ra 605 F3d 90(3 Cr 00 t is thus necessary to appy the moie categorcal approach byexaminng certan ocuments comprsing the reco of convicton" to etene whether heresponent was convicted of an aggravate feony JeaLo pra at 66 hepardv 5 U.S. 6 005 The Jugment shows that the responent pe gulty toUS.C Conspre to Sell Conaban Cgaettes" (Exh. Tab C Moeove the

lea Agreement provdes

wil enter a pea of guity to Cots [sic of the nictment Cot chgesthat knowingy wlllly conspired with other pesons to knowingly shiptansport receive possess sel distribute purchase contraban cigaretes asthat term is ene in ite Unite States Code Section to wt aqutty of moe tan 0000 cigaetes which boe no evdence ofthe payment ofappicabe State cgarette txes n violaton of USC al in violationofUS.C 37

(Exh Tab C. We aee with he mmigration Juge that te conviction documents submitte

by the S show that the espondent was convicted of conspiring to comit an oense againste Unte States (ie. voation of a reguatory statute as oppose to deaung" theUted States lJ. at 5 ee .SC. Thus the HS has not show hat au o ecetwere necessary elements of the responent's conviction under .SC.

Futherore the esponent ped guty to an unerying oense statng that i]t shall beunlaw y peson knowingy to shp transport eceive possess sel distribute orpurchase contraban cigettes or contaban smokeess tobacco" U.SC. ; eeMaer of Vo 5 & ec. 6 -0 (A 0 (concung that it is necessary to exine



4/13

A073538 314

e underyn sbsanve crme n deenn weer a convcon r an ncoae oenserenders an alen removabe. Ts sae conan no elemen of aud or dece (IJ. a 5Smlarly, e denon of conraband caees" does no rerence ad or dece, descbncarees

bearn] no evdence of e aymen of cabe Sae or loca caree axes ne Sae or locay were suc carees are und, f e Sae or ocaloveen reqres a sa, mresson, or oer ndcaon o be laced onackaes or oe conaners of carees o evdence ymen of caree xes.

18SC 2341(2 We e DS clas a leslave sory demonsraes a Conress

enaced 8 SC 234(a o so afckn by eleen of oranzed cme seekn o evadees, leslave sory s relevan were e anue of e saue s an.Maer of Aowoshe I&N Dec. 442, (BA 2008 Ued aes v Gozaes520 S. 1, 6 (997 e DS also as no ced case law oldn a 8 .SC 32(anecessay nvoves aud or dece C Kashma v Hoder 3 SC. 166 (202 (ndn

alens convcon r wlly makn d sbscrbn a false ax re qualed aavaed felones nder secon 01(a(3(M of e Ac becase ey necessay enaedadulen or dece condc For ese reons, we a e odn a e DHS a noroven removably under secon 237(a(2(A( of e Ac by clea and convncn evdence

W rerd o e remann care, e Board as dened moral rde" as condca s nereny be, vle, or derved, cony o e acceed ues of oray d e desowed o oer ersons eher ndvdally or o socey n eneral" Kapk v Ashro384 F3d 84, 89 (3d Cr 00 Maer of Frak 20 &N Dec. 867, 868 (BA 994. as on been reconed a crmes nvolvn aud oun o CMs. Maer of Fores7 I&N Dec. 225, 28 (BI 980

As noed bove, an alcaon of e moded caeocal aroac sows a eresonden was no convced of e ron of 18 S C 37 nvolvn consrcy o deaudhe ned Saes (Ex 2, ab C Fureore, neher ad nor dece s an eleenof 18 SC 232(a e saue underlyn e resonden's convcon r consracy(. 6; E. 2, ab C We ee w e Imaon Jude a 18 SC 232(a doesno come wn e denon of moral uude" because s a relaory saue desed oreulae e axes, lcensn nd admnsave reqremens r comercal dsbersof carees (.J a 67 ee Maer of LC 22 &N Dec 594 (BA 1999 (ulna a cency scun oense w no a CIM; Maer of G 7 I& Dec 1,115, 18 (BA 956 (oldn a a convcon r e ossesson d ransoaon of dsled

srs ou sms axed ereo" n volaon of censn and relan rovsons ofhe Ineal Revenue Code" was no CIM becase e volaon of saues wc ereylcense r reuae nd se cnl lably ou reard evl nen do n nvlveoral ude"; see aso Maer of J- 2 &N Dec. 99, 10 (A 94 Maer of V I& Dec 93, 294 (BA 94 Maer of G &N Dec. 59, 62 (BIA 94 Conce eDSs aruen a 18 .SC 2342(a s a ax evaon cre, e sae does no requreroof a a defendan kew a Sae reques a caee axes be ad, or a e or seknew a es d no been ad (J. 7. s sufcen a he dendan knownlyossessed caees on wc es ve no been ad .J a 7 Moreover, 8 S.C 232(a

3



5/13

A07338 3

dos ot ist atativ ms i a man tat woud pit appicatio o t modidcatgoica appoac to dtmi w t spodt was covictd o vio, wicmigt quai as a CIMT ee Deamp pra at 2283 T w a cocusiotat DHS o dmosatd movabiiy ud sctio 237(a)(2)(A)(ii) o Act byca ad covicig vidc.

Accodigy t owig od is td

ORDER T app is dismissd

T mmigatio Judg did ot dtmi wt spodts 201 covictio was aCMT W d ot addss tis issu bcaus v assumig tat t spodts20 covictio was a CIM as ot b covictd o a scod C MT as cssy tond im mov usuat to scti 237a2Aii o t Act



6/13

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICEEXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION VIEW

UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION COTYORK, PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE ATTER OF:

COUDHRY, amid

Respondent

) IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS)) File# 07338-31)))

On Behal o Respondent:omas Bannen sq

On Behalf of DSWiiam LoeSenio Aoey

Grounds o Remova NA 237(a)(2(A)(iii); (a)(2)(A)(ii)

Motion eination by Respondent

Rui o Motio ad Order

Proedura Hitory

is espondent is a yeaod male alien, a citizen of akistan wo was neite admied

no paoled into te United States He adjusted status to law pemanen esiden on uly 2000He was placed into tese Remova oceedings by pesona sevice of a Notice to Appea (A) onFebuay 203 caging im wi two counts of emovabiity pusuant to INA237(a)(2)(A)(iii) aving commied an agavated lony as dened in section 1 (a)(3)(M)() an oense tatinvoves aud o deceit in wic e oss to te victim o victims exceeds 10000; ad as denedin NA 01(a)(3)(U), an atempt o conspiacy to commit an oense descbed in 101(a)(3)

On Mac 203, espondent led a moion o teminate poceedings aguing atte goveent iled to meet its buden in estabising at is conviction is a aggavated lonyas dened in 10(a)(3)((i).See Respondents Bie On Mac 21 2013 in addition to inga memoandum n opposition to espondents motion to teinate, goveent counsel ed Fo

1261 lodging an additiona cage of emovabiity unde NA 237(a)(2)(A)(ii) as an aienconvicted of two cimes involving moal tpitude not aising out of a singe sceme of ciminalmscondct om -6; emoandum of Law.

On ly 13 201 espondent was convicted of Atempted Obstucting GoveenaAdministation 2 egee in violation of N.Y P.. 0190 Exhibt 2-F. On Octobe 3,2012 e was convicted in fedeal distct cou of Conspiacy to Sel Contaband Cgaees invoation of 18 US.C 31, ad sentenced to tee mons incaceation. Exhbt 2-C


7/13

Law ad Aay

1. Aravated Feoe der !NA (a(43(( ad !NA (a(43(U

a ea tadard

Uder the INA "a]y ae wh s cvcted f a aggravated y at ay te aeradss s deprtabe A 23 7(a)(2)(A)() Whe aayzg a partcuar ese t deterewhether t csttutes a aggravated y curts appy a "categrca apprach ad k y tthe statut det f the ese; ey d t csder the cua crcustaces surrudgthe pcuar vat ayr v US 9 US 7 (1990) See Kawasha v der US 32 SCt 166 172 (202) (T detere wheter a cre vves aud r decet cutsust epy a "categrica apprach whch t cuses the cres statut eeets "ratertha the specc cts uderyg the cre)

wever where a statute s "dvsbe that t ecpasses dverse casses f criaacts se f whch re gruds r reva d thers whch are t curts exae the statutethru a "ded categrica apprach Matter fSweetser 22 &N Dec 709 73-1 (BIA999) he "ded categrica apprach pets a curt t k beyd the statute ad t terecrd f cvct r the ted purpse f deterg whether the aes cvct s uderthe p f the statute that wud reder h revabe Alaka v Atty Ge 6 F3d 88, 10-106(3d Ci 2006); Matter VargasSrmet 23 I & N Dec 61 6 (BIA 200) (where a statutes dvsbe t s pessbe t rer t the recrd f cvct r the ted purpse fdeterg uder whch p f the dvsbe statute the respdet has bee cvcted)

A !NA (a(43(U

A dg f revaby based a aggravated y uder A 10(a)( 3 )(U) requresthe gveet t destrate by cear ad cvcg evdece that ( 1) the ae was cvcted fegagg a "cspracy wth the eg f sect 10 (a)(3)(U) f te Act (2) tat at easte f the uawfu acts that was te bject f the cspracy was a ese vvg a aggravatedy ad (3) ay ther aspect f the grud f deprtat ccued r was ctepated atter

fS1K 2 I&N ec 32 327 (BIA 2007)

Sce the te "cspracy s t deed the Act t s presued that Cgress tededt adpt the c aw eag f that te Matter fRchards 2 &N Dec. 226 (BIA 200)t US v Shaba 53 US 0 (99) ths regard the Supree Curt has repeatedy hedthat the essece f a cspracy s a agreeet t ct a uaw act E Uted Sttesv eezRec 37 . 270 27 2003 qot ae v ted States 20 US 770 777

2


8/13

975) ad ciin United Sates v Shaani 53 US a 16) Therere, whe a cospiacyconvictio i sme staes may require a over ac, the er "cospiracy in sectio 101(a)(43)(U)of he Act is o limed conspiracies ha require the commissio f ovet ac i theraceof the cnspiracy y one of e cospiraors Maer of Richardson 25 &N Dec a 226

B A a)(43)M)i)

A aggavated felony uder NA 0(a)43)M)(i) has two disict eemets: 1) i muse a crme hat "ivoves aud or decei (2) "in which the ss t the vicim or vicims exceeds$1,

a. "inos aud or dci

In Valansi v Ashcro e Third Circui examied wheher he prase oese hat-ivvesaud r decei has a pai meang 278 F 3d 203 3d Cir 20) It hed

that he wrd "ivolves meas "t have wiin or as prt of itsel or "o require as aecessa accompaiment Westers Third ew Ineaioal Dictio a 1191 Thus aoese tha "ivlves aud or decei is most nauray iereted as an oese tha

icludes aud or decei as a necessa componet or eement t does n require howeverha he eements of he oense e cexensive wih he crie of aud

Id a 209-1;s aso Bo v Ay e 458 F3d 23 28 (3d Cir 2006) "[W]e have hed hasusectio ()(i) covers a oeses tha have as a essentil eemet an inet o deaud ordeceive); Ki Se Lee v Ashcro 368 F3d 28, 222 3d Cir 24) ("usectio (M)(i) has ageera appcatio-he gamut of stae and deral cries invoving aud d deceit causig ssesover $0000)

b. in which h oss o h icim or icims xcd $10,000"

To deerine wheher he alies oense invoed a oss o a vicims) exceedg $1000,cours mus use a "circumstancespecic approach Nhawa v Hoder 557 S 29 009)

3


9/13

Kaplun v tty Ge 602 F.3d 260, 265 (3d Cir2010), wheren the loss must be ethered" to theactua "oense of conviction, not "acquitted or dismssed counts orgeneral conduct,Nijhaw an 129 S.Ct. at 2302; Aaka v. Att'y Gen., 456 F.3d at106-08 (3d Cr.2006)

B Repodet Covtio

The resondent was convicted r the oense of Consracy to Sel Contraand Ciareesin violaton of 8 U.S.C 37 which states

f two or more ersons consire ether to commt any oense aanst the Unted States orto deaud the United States or any aency thereof n any maner or r any urose and oneor more of such ersons do any act to eect the oject of he consracy each shall e neduder this title or imrsoned not more than ve years or oth

8 US.C.37 Resondent eaded uil to Count 1 of the nrmaton whch indicates that

the oense underlyin his consiracy conviction was 8 U.S.C 2342(a) which states

t shal e unlaw r any erson knowinly to shi transort receive ossess selldistriute or urchase contraand ciarettes or contraand smokeess toacco

8 USC. 2342ee Exibit 2C

The resndent rst arues that in order to deterine if his conviction involves aud rdeceit the "modied cateorical aroach must e aed to 37 ecause the statute s divislein that a erson can consire to either () commt an oense aainst the United States or (2) deaudthe United States ee Resondent's Motion e rther arues that the onl oton of the sttute

that contns an element of aud is under the latter ortion consiracy to deaud and y ooknat the convicton record it is evident that his conviction does not fal under the consracy to"deaud the Unted States. By contrast he arues hat the ateora approah must e aiedto 8 U.S.C. 2342 iven that the staute does not contan any element of aud or decetGoveent counsel however arues tat the resondent's convction s of essence a convictioninvolvin nvason and consequently nvoves aud and decet. ee HS Bref

Resondent is coect that the modied cateorica aroach must e aied to 37ecause the statute contains eements which may or may not constitute aud or deceit.Consequenty the Court must look to the record of convicton to make is deteination The"Judment in Crimnal Court states that resondent was adjuded uilty of Count Consiracyto Sel Contraand Ciaretes. owever in order to determine which eement of37 resondentin ct was convicte r the cr mst to the Pea reement r assistance The eareement states the resondent leaded uilty to Count and rther states

esondent nowinly and wly consired with other ersons to knowinly shtransot receive ossess sell distrute and urchase contraand carettes as the term ened in tle 8 United States Code Section 234 to wit: a quantity of more than

4


10/13

10,000 caettes whch boe o edece o the paymet of appcae State caee taxes, olato of 18 .S.C. 2342a), al olato o 18 U.S.C31.

See ehb -Cat lea Aeemet p.1. By ook at ths statemet, t s cocluded that espodet

peaded uly to cospacy to commt a oese aast the Uted States because the actostake by the esodet wee olato o 18 U.S.C. 2342a), whch s the udey oese.We the aeemet states that taxes wee ot pad o these caettes, the ea Aeemet does oteect ay tet to deaud e Uted States. heee, ths court must urthe ayze thestatutory elemets o 18 U.S.C. 2342a) to deteme espodet's udely oese olesaud o decet.

accodce wth Valas Ashco,supra, the Court empoys he cateorc appoachto 18 .S.C. 2342a), d caot o beyod e stuto auae. Because oe of he eemets s staute oes aud o decet, a cocto ude 18 .S.C. 2342a) s ot a aaatedoy oese aud o decet as deed A 10 a)43)M)). Sce espodet's

cocto does ot ole aud o decet as equed a arated loy as deed A 101a)43)M)), the amout o oss to the ctm s ot elevt. Futhemoe, becauseespodet's cocto does ot meet the deto o a aaated oy ude NA 10la)43)), t theee caot costtute a atempt o cospacy to commt a aaatedoy ude A 10a)43)). e ouds o aaate oy wl theee be dsmssed.

rmes Inong Mora Turptude (CI)

a Lega Standard

ode to costtute moay turptudous behao, the act must e epehesbe ad

oe some m of sc eteoscousess o debeato. Matte ofSlva-evo, 24 & ec.8 A.. 2008) ka. At'y e, 41 F.3d 408, 414 3d C. 200). Moa turpude "eeseealy to coduct whch s eety base, le, o depaed, ad cotary to the accepted resomoaty ad the dutes owed betwee pesos o to socey eea. Mol urptude has eedeed as a act whch sper se moally epehese ad tscally wo. Mae oFak,20 &N ec. 8, 88 BA 1994) ctatos omtted) As e Boad has oseed, []he test todeterme a crme oles moa urptude s whee the act s accompaed y a mote ocorrupt d. Mate ofFloes, 1 &N ec. 22 BA 1980). Moal urptude cotas ahoes compoet ... wch cudes coduct tat s cotay to ustce, hoesy, o moaySmrko Ashco, 38 F.3d 29, 283 3d C. 2004)

I determ whethe a state aw cocto costtutes a CM, the Boad ad the hdCcut ha hstoca appd a cateoca aoach, cus o he u crmastatut athe tha the aes specc act.' apk Ashco 384 F.3d 84, 88 3d C. 2004)qutngeoeyoso. Ashco, 293 F.3d 33, 3 3d C. 2002)). hus, as eteated Jaous Att'y e, 82 F.3d 42 3d C. 2009), the hd Ccut looks] to the eemets ote statutory state oese, ot to the specc cts. Kapk Ashco, 384 F.3d at 89 uongWlso . Ashco, 30 F.3d 3, 381 3d C 2003)).


11/13

When sue is "divisle mening h prohis severl dieren ypes of conduc we"look o he record of convicion o deermine wheher he lien was convced under ] par of hesaue whch] denes] crime involving morl urpide P 41 F3d 411 When nosusecion s specied in he record of convicion he cour egins is caegoric inuiry wih hesusecon reuiring he "les culpiliy Id ccordingly crime involves morl urpiude whenhe les culple conduc necess o susn convicon under he sue cn e consideredmoraly urpiudous Id

Documens comprising respondens record of convcon nd hus dmissile include heInrmion chrge or indicmen ple verdic or judgmen senence nd rascrp omproceedigs of ignmen Maer ofTeixeir 21 I& Dec 316 319 (BI 1996) 8 CF 100341 See also Pryk v y Gen 41 F3d 408 414 (3d Cir 2005) (record of convicionincludes he "indicmen ple verdic nd senence) The modied cegoricl pproch hs eenpplied even when cler secionl dvisons do no delinee he suory vrions in order o

deermine he leas culple conduc sucien r convicion d where CMT s sseredmesures h conduc r deprvy Gci v y Gen. 462 F3d 28 (3d Cir 2006) courpplying he moded cegorc pproch my only consider he chrging documen o he exenha he peiioner ws cually conviced of he chrges Evnson v y Gen 550 F 3d 284 293(3d Cir 2008)

b Respondent's Convictions

(1) Conviction forConspiracy to e/ContrabandCigaretes under 18 USC 371 and18 usc 234

s dscussed previously responden was conviced of conspring o sell conrd cigreesin violion o 18 SC31 nd he underlying regulo oense ws Trckng in Conrndin violion of 18 SC2342) Govemen counsel rgues h his covicion is CIMecuse i involves ud or decei ee DHS Brie While goveen cousel recognizes haud or decei re no express elemens of he oense he rgues hese oenses rele o n evsionof cigree ax which is a CIM

rcking n Conrnd in volion of 18 SC 2342() penlizes person whoowingyships rnspors receives possesses sells disiues or purchases cond cigeesowihsnding he cour concurs wih responden h his crime is no morlly urpiudnous

ecuse i is regulo sue desgned o regule he xes licensing nd adminisrvereuiremens r commercl disriuors of cigrees nd rhermore i lacks he reuse eviintent needed o e er se morlly reprehensile nd irinsclly wrong

he llowing Bord decisions dice gins nding o CMT in his nsnce MaeroG & Dec 114 BI 1956) where he Bord held h convicion r he "possession andransporion of dislled spiris wihou x smps xed hereo in violon of "licesg reguling provisions o he Inel evenue Code ws no CIMT ecuse e "v

iolion of

6


12/13

J

saues wc merey cense or reguae and mpose crmnal lby wou regard o evilnendo no nvolve moral urpude d a 15, 8 empass added) Even a kowng volaon of ea saue, en, woud no be enoug o ransrm a reguao oense no a CMT; Maer of J2 &N Dec 99, I 04 BA 944)oldng a a convcon under a federal saue probng e sae

of alcoo o Nve Amecans was no a CMT because "[regulory encmens of s naure dono creae crmes nvolvng morl urpude) Maer of I &N Dec 29, 294 BA942)oldng a a convcon uder e deral Narcoc Drugs mpo and Epor Ac of 909,wc penazed "knowngy mporng or parcpang n e mporaon of narcoc dugs, wasno a CMT because e Ac "s a reguao ac and a e volaon of s erere no a crmenvovng moral upude); Mer of, &N Dec 59, 62 BA 1941 )odng a gamblng nvolaon of New Yorks gamng aw was a reguao oense ad so no a CMT)

uermore, e ck of a suceny ev nen aso payed e decsve roe n oldesenv INS 8 d 645 9 Cr99), were e cour ed e reguao oese of "wysrucurng nancal deposs n order o preven a bank om ng curency repos n voaon of

dera aw s no a CMT, because "ev nenas opposed o wlness or kowledge a econduc s unaws no eemen o e crme Id 648 Te Board adoped odesen ass rule naonwde n MaerofLVC, 22 &N Dec 594, 60 BA 1999), odng a a voaonof e srucurng saue nvolves "noper se moray repreensbe conduc

Fureore, e legsave sory of e Conrabad Cgarees Trckng Ac CCTA),PL 95575 92 Sa 2464), om wc 18 SC 242 s derved, ebs e nen of Congresso enac legslaonregutinge sae of cgareesSee generly978 SCode Cong & AdNews5518 order o be convced uder 8 SC 242, e goveen s no requred o sow yevl nen nsead, s ony requred o sow e responden kew e pysca nae of wae possessed "a quan n ecess of 60000 cgarees wc [bore no evdence of e paymen of

appcable sae cgaree aes ned Saes v Elsena, 80 F2d 856, 859 6 Cr 986)Tus, n e presen case, e goveen s no requred o prove responden knew a e

Sae requres a cgaree aes be pd, or a e kew a e es ad no been pd ssucen responden kowngy possessed cgarees e aes of wc s no been padConsequenly, responden's conduc s m/um prhibitum n naure snce s merey probed bye aw, raer an m/um in se, beng nereny wrong Terere, absen any conduc wc snereny base, ve, or depraved, and conrary o e acceped rules of moray, respondensconvcon under 18 SC 242) s no a CMT

Concuson

7


13/13

Basd n h rging cu is cnsraind cncr wi rsndn h gvn has ild m is burdn f rf sabish a viain f ihr A 23a2Aiii r A 23a2Aii Th min rmina i b gand

Or Ts rmval rcdings ar rby rminad

Ai 4 203

Wa A. Duingiain dg

1 While the cour onus that espondent's onviction attemptng to obstut ovmena dinstraion s aCIMT, Mat ofFlores, 17 &N De. 225(BA 1980) ths sngula convtion cnt stand beause i wasommed more tan ve years ae hs admisson to the Unted States

8

Hamid Choudhry, A073 538 314 (BIA Sept. 4, 2013)

Documents

Transcript of Hamid Choudhry, A073 538 314 (BIA Sept. 4, 2013)