Molot, David, Esq.

Law Ofices of Arcia & Associates

82-17 Roosevelt Avenue, 2nd FL
Jackson Heights, NY 11372
U.S. Department of Justice
Executive Offce fr Imigration Review
Baar af Immigrat/an Appeals
0{ce af t/e Clerk
5107 leesburg Pike. Suite 2000
Fals Church, Vrginia 20530
OHS/ICE Ofice of Chief Counsel - NYC
26 Federal Plaza, 11th Floor
New York, NY 10278
Name: HERNANDEZ HERNANDEZ, JOR ... A 045-582-968
Date of this notice: 5
/
20/
2014
Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision and order in the above-refrenced case.
Enclosure
Panel Members:
Guendelsberger, John
Hofman, Sharon
Adkins-Blanch, Charles K.
Sincerely,
D= cO
Donna Carr
Chief Clerk
schwarzA
Userteam: Docket
For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
Cite as: Jorge Hernandez-Hernandez, A045 582 968 (BIA May 20, 2014)
U.S. Deparment of Justce
Executve Ofce fr Imgaton Review
Decision of te Boad of Imgaton Appeals
Falls Cuch Viga 20530
File: A045 582 968 -New York, NY
mr: JORGE HERADEZHERAEZ
I REMOVAL PROCEEDIGS
APPEAL
ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: David Molot, Esquire
ON BEHALF OF DHS: Amada Jeanopoulos
Assistat Chef Counsel
APPLICATION: Terination of proceedings
Date:
M\ 3 D /"!`
The Deaent of Homelad Security (DHS) appeals the Imigaton Judge's decision,
dated Noveber 29, 2011, in which te Iigation Judge terated te reova
proceedings against the respondent. The appea will be dismissed.
Te Boad reviews fndings of fat made by the Immigaton Judge unde a clealy
eroneou stadad. 8 C.F.R. 1003.l(d)(3)(i). We review questions of law, including
wheter te paies have met te relevat burden of proof, ad issues of dscreton uder a de
novo stadad. 8 C.F.R. 1003.l(d)(3)(ii).
The resondet, a native ad citizen of Mexico, was adited to te United States as a
lawfl peraent resident on Jauary 17, 1997. He wa subsequently convicted on
September 9, 1999, in the New York Cout Cou, Westchester Couty, fr the crime of
Arson in the Fou Degee under New York State Penal Law section 150.05. He later
applied fr admission to te Unted States as a lawfl peraet residet on Mach 2, 2006.
Section 150.05 provides tat ''a person is gilty of ason in te fuh degee when he
recklessly daages a buildig or motor vehicle by intentionally staing a fre or causing a
explosion. " The goveent conteds tat te resondent's conviction is a crime involving
moral tuitde which renders him inadissible uder section 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) of te
Im gaton ad Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(Q.
The queston on apeal is whether te ofense of ason in the fur degee uder section
150.05 of te New York State Penal Code qualifes categorcally or under te modifed
categorcal approach as a crme involving moral titude ("CIT'') so as to support a
chage of inassibility uder section 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(Q of the Act. Deterining whether a
cr conviction is a crme involving moral tuitude requires a aalysis of te statute
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
Cite as: Jorge Hernandez-Hernandez, A045 582 968 (BIA May 20, 2014)
A045 582 968
under which te alien has been convicted (as opposed to te aien's conduct tat resulted in
te conviction). See Matter of Silva-Trevino, 24 I&N Dec. 687 (A.G. 2008) (oldig tat,
when deterining whether a conviction is fr a crme involving moral tuitude, te Boad
should frst look to te statute of conviction uder the categorical inquiry ad deterine
wheter tere is a "reaistic probability " tat te state crimina statute pursuat to which te
alie was convicted would be applied to reach conduct tat does not involve mora
tuitde).
A te United States Supreme Cout recently explaned, the modfed categorica approach is
a tool tat helps cous implement the categorica approach by supplying tem wit a mechasm
to identif te "elements " of ofenses asing unde "divisible " criminal stattes. See Descamps
v. United State, 133 S. Ct. 2276, 2285 (2013). Under Descamps, the modifed categorical
approach applies ony if: (1) te statte of conviction is "divisible " in the sense tat it lsts
multiple discrete ofenses as enumerated alteratves or defnes a single ofense by referece to
disjunctive sets of elements, more ta one combination of which could support a conviction;
ad (2) some (but not all) of tose listed ofenses or combiations of disjunctive elemets ae a
categorica match to the relevat generc stadad. Id. at 2281, 2283. The modifed categorical
approach does not apply merely because te elements of te crime ca sometmes be proved by
refrence to conduct tat fts te generc federal stadad; i te view of te Descamps Cout,
such crimes ae "ovebroad, " but not "divisible." Id. at 2285-86, 2290-92 (emphasis added.
Thus, te Supree Cour has over led Matter of Lanferan, 25 I&N Dec. 721 (BIA 2012), in
which te Boad held that a crminal statte is dvisible, regadless of its stcte, if based on
te elemets of te ofense, some but not all violatons of the statute give rse to gounds fr
removal or ineligibility fr relief.
A te Supreme Cou explained, the modifed categorica approach:
retans te categorica approach's cental featre: a fcu on te elements, rate ta te
fcts, of a crime. And it preseres te categorica approach's basic method: compaing
tose elements with te generc ofense's. All the modifed categorical approach adds is a
mechasm fr maing that compason when a statute lists multiple, atertive
elemets, ad so efectively creates "severa diferent ... crimes." ... If at least one, but
not all of tose crimes matches te generic version, a court needs a way to fnd out which
te defendat wa convicted of. That is the job, as we have always uderstood it, of te
modifed categorical approach: to identif, fom aong several ateratives, te crime of
conviction so that te cou ca compae it to te generic ofense.
Decamps, supra, at 2285 (interal citation omitted.
We fd tat te statute under which the respondent wa convicted is not categorcally a
crime involving mora tuitde. The statute at issue, New York Pena law 150.05
provides tat "[A] peson is guilty of ason in the fu degee when he recklessly daages
2
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
Cite as: Jorge Hernandez-Hernandez, A045 582 968 (BIA May 20, 2014)
A045 582 968
a building or motor vehicle by intentionally staing a fre or causing a explosion. " Under
the statute, the least culpable conduct necessary to sustan a conviction is recklessly engagng
i conduct which daages a building or motor vehicle. See Michel v. LNS., 206 F.3d 253
(2nd Cir. 2000). Te generic elements of ason require the specifc intent of a wilfl ad
malicious bung of persona property. US. v. Hathaway, 949 F.2d 609 (2nd Ci. 1991).
Because te statute under which te respondent was convicted does not have a element of
secifc intent, we conclude tat the statte is not categorically a crme ivolving moral
tuitude.
We fher fnd tat the respondent's conviction is not a cre involving moral tuitde
when considered under te modifed categorical approach. The Supreme Court held in
Descamps, supra, that the modifed categorical aproach applies only if: (1) te statute of
conviction is "divisible " in the sense tat it lists multiple discrete ofenses as enumerated
alteratives or defnes a single ofense by reference to disjunctive sets of elements, more ta
one combination of which could support a convicton; ad (2) some (but not all) of tose
listed ofenses or combinations of dsjunctve elements ae a categorcal match to the relevat
generc stadad. The statute in tis case is not divisible since it does not contain discrete
ofenses or contain a dsjunctive set of elements. Accordingly, we ae not permtted to refer
to the record of conviction fr clarifcation.
Even if we fund tat te modifed categorcal inquiry peitted a exainaton of the
record of conviction to discer te nature of the derlyng ofense of conviction, we would
reach te sae conclusion. Altough te DHS corectly agues tat the laguage contaned
in te Felony Complaint describes conduct tat may constitute tupitudinous conduct, naely
trowig gasoline ad a lit match on the ktchen foor of a woma's home while she was
present, te record reveals that te respondent was not convicted under tat laguage. I
fact, that laguage relates to the chage unde section 150.15 New York State Penal Code.
Instead, the respondent was convicted of te less serious conduct descrbed in section 150.05
of te New York Penal Law. Accordingly, we agee wit the Imigation Judge tat the
statute under which the respondent wa actually convicted is insufcient to constitute a crme
involving moral tuitude.
Accordingly, te Imgtion Judge's decision is afed ad te chage of
inadmissibility under section 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) of te Act is not sustaied.
ORDER: Te apeal is dismissed ad tese proceedings ae terinated.
3
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
Cite as: Jorge Hernandez-Hernandez, A045 582 968 (BIA May 20, 2014)
(
.

l
UNJJLD 5AJL5 DLEAHJNLN Ot JU5JC
LXtCUJ1VL Ott1CL tOH 1HHJGHAJON HLV1Lh
JNN1GHJON COUHJ
NeW 1CIK NeW 1CK
t1Je NC. ' A 4O DbZ Jbb NCVemDeI Z J Z JJ
JD LDe NLLeI C
JOHGL HLHNANDLZ

HLHNNDLZ JN HLNOVAL EHOCLLDJNG5

CHABGL1
AEELJCATJON1
He5CDUeDL
beC11CD ZJZ [} [ Z} [A} [ 1 } [1} C LDe

Jm1QI11CD ACL
~ D J1eD WDC D5 DeeD CCDV1C1eU C CI1me
1DVC1V1DQ 0CIJ 1uI11uUe

.
.
TeI01DL1CD.
ON BLHAIt Ot HL5EONDLN1

ON BE HALt Ot DH1
DV1U NOJCL J11 1uCL0D
OBL DC15JON O JH JNN1GHA1ON

JUDGL
He5CDUeD1 W5 Q1CeO 1D Ie0CVJ ICCeU1DQ5 1DICuQD 1D0
NCL1Ce 1C AeI LXD1D1L NC. I, 1S5DuO eCe0DeI JZ Z ,
5LL1DQ 1De CDIQe eIDCU DCVe.
B5eC CD 1JQ11D5 1D QeIL1DeD1

I1 1De Ie5QCDUeDL W5

CCDVlC1eU C ISOD

1D 1De CuILD

UeQ

Iee UDCeI NeW 1CIk LW

5eCL1CD JD. O 1De

CODV1CL1CD CCCI1DQ 1D

S

QeKeI lJJ lD
he5LCDe5LeI CCuD1y

NuW ?CI
_
.
JDe I1CI D151OI_C 1De C5e 15 5e1

CUI 1D 1De UeC151CD

ICm 1De BCIU C 1m1

QIL1CD Ae15 DC 1De

I1CI UeC151CD fr.om

..
J
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
.
(
LhlB lWlQILlCH uUQe.
1he CCuL hB IeCCnBlCeIeO the CBe nC Lhe eVlOenCe
QLeBenLeC ln 1lQhL C Lhe CClBlCn ln MLLeI C Sl1V~1IeVlnC.
1he CCuIL BLl11 De1leVeB LhL DHS DB nCL TeL llB DuICen C
eBLD1lBhlnQ LhL Lhe IeBQCnCenL*B CCnVlCLlCn

CL IBCn ln Lhe
CuI Lh CeQIee

unOeI NeW YCIk LW lB CIlTe lnVC1VlnQ TCI1
.
LuQlLuOe. 1he DeQItTenL C HCTe1nC SeCuIlLy hB QIeSenLeO
eVlOenCe LhL tenCB LC BhCW LhL Lhe IeBQCHCenL CC0lLLeC CeILln
CLB L Lhe L1Te C

Lhe CIlTe DC thL LheBe ClB lnVC1VeC TC1

LuIQlLuCe ln Lhe CIClnIy leW. The DeQILTenL C HCTeJnO
SeCUIlLy hB nCL hCWeVeI BhCWn tht the IBQCnnL WB
CCnV1CLeC C CIlmln1 CenBe unCeI NeW 1CIk LW LhL lnVC1VeB
Lhe e1eTenLB C TOIJ LuIQlLUCe.
The CCuIL De11eVeB LhL WheLheI QeIBCn CCmlLB BCTe
QILlCu1IJy CDjeLlCnD1e V1ClCUB Ct

nCLheH 1LeI lB
CCnVlCLeC CI Ie1LlVe1y TlnCI CIl0ln1 CenBe Ie1LeC LC LhL
CCnCuCt lL CCeB nC1 men LhL he hB DeCn CCVlCLeU C 1J the
DC CLB nC Lhe VC1CuB ChICLI LhL nVC1VeB lnLhe TCBL
exLIeTe VeIBCn C Lhe 11eQL1CnB QlnBL l0.
1hlB lB BC lI51 DeCuBe lL hB nCL DeeH QICVCn ln CCUIL
^\


C LW Dy GCVeImenL eVCeOCe @ hC CeenCnL`B

Q1e C

QUl1Ly
DC BeCCnU DCuB Ih eBBenLl1 e1eTenL B

nCt WhL QeISCn

ClC DuL ILheI WhL QeIBCn hB Deen CCnVlCLeU C UnOeI CuI
1eQd1 ByBLem.
Ne hVe LLClLlCn11y BlC Lht iHlQILlCn LCuLLB Oo nCL
A 4

D 582 68 2 NCVeTDeI 29, 20IJ

I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t


l
1CCk Deh1nC Lhe Ce C Lhe CCnV1CL1Cn. S C LhL 1 QeIBCn WB
CCnVlCLeU C ICDDeIy nC ByB LhL he B10Q1y QlCkeC uQ BC0e 1CBL
QICQeILy nC 1nLenCeC LC IeLuIn 1L LC LheCWneL DuL CIQCL LC OC
BC 1n L10e We CC nCL By L hL he 1B nCl Le0CVD1e eVen LhCuQh he
hB ICDDeIy CCnV1CL1Cn Cn h1B LCCkB. we By De 1B Ie0CVD1e.
L1XeWlBe B far B LDe CCUIL lB CCnCeIneC 1 Lhe IeBQCnCenL 0y
hVe CCne BC0eLh1nQ 0CIe BeI1CuB DUL eVenLu11y 1B CDJQ CCnV1CLeC
C BC0eLh1nQ 1eBS BeIlCuB Lhe CL LhL LDeIe 1B BC0e eV1CenCe
LC BuQQCIL Lhe V1eW 1D1 he CCTlLLeC Lhe 0CIe BeI1CuB CCnOuCL 1B
HC1 enCuQh LC kC h10 BuD_eCL LC Ie0CVJ When Lhe ChIge C
Ie0CV1 CeQenUB Cn vhL he W B "CCnV1CLeO C"

ILheI Lhn WhL he
"QICDDJQ CC."
ECI LheBe

IeBCnB 1De CCuIL BL1J1 De1leVeB LhL Lhe

DeIL0enL hB nCL [ICVen LhL Lhe IeBCnCenL WB CCnV1CLeO C
CI10e 1nVO1V1nQ 0CI1 LuI1LuCe. i CC nCL De11eVe LhL Lhe NeW
YCIk BLLuLCIy CenBe C IeCk1eBBJj C0QlnQ Du11C1nQ Wh1Ch i
nCLe neeC nCL De 1C0e neeO nCt hVe nyCne 1n 1L eL CeteI
1B 1n CL CI10e

1nVCJV1nQ 0CI1 LuIQ1LuUC DeCBe 1L CCCuIIeC

B Lhe

IeBu1L C "1nLenL1Cn11y LI1nQ 1Ie W1Ch ln 1LBe1

1B nCL CIJ0C 1VCJ V1nQ 0OI1 LuIQl LUCu DuL QC5BlD1y Cne C Le
CD1eVo0eHLB
C

huTnX1nU.
ECI LDeBe Ie5CFB LDe CBe 15 heIeDy t,eLFLeU.

\
AL A. VOHCK
Un1LO LLCB iH0lQI1CO UOQe

A 045 582 96 o NCVemeI 2 9, 20II
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
. \_t

CHJJtJCAJ EAGE
J DeIeDy CeI11y LD1 1De 11CDeU QICCeeU1DQ LeCIe JUDG ALAN
A. VONAChA 1D 1De 011eI C1
JOHG HEHNANEZ HEHNANDEZ
A AD Db2 Jbb
NeW 1CIK NeW 1CIK
15 D CCuI1e VeID110 1ID5CI1QL C 1De IeCCIU1DQ 5 QICV1UeU Dy
1De XeCu11Ve O1Ce CI Jm1QI11CD HeV1eW DU 1D1 1D15 15 1De
CI1Q1DJ 1ID5CI1Q1 LDeIeC CI 1De 1Je C 1De tXeCu11Ve O1Ce
LCI JI1QI11CD HeV1eW.
hIeD CCeD BICCX5 JID5CI1DeI
tIee 511e HeQCI11DQ JDC .
teLIuIy A 2J2
[CC0QJe11CD U1e}
By 5uD01551CD C 1D15 CBTJIJCAT PAG 1De CCDLIC1CI CeI111e5
1D1 5CDy BEC/~1A ACDDDeJ 1ID5CI1DeI CI eQu1VJeD1 DU/CI
CO 5 Ue5CI1DeU 1D 5eC11CD C QIQIQD C.o.o.Z C 1De COD1IC1
W5 u5eU 1C 1ID5CI1Le 1De HeCCIU C EICCeeU1DQ 5DCWD 1D 1De DCVe
QIQIQD.
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t