 Recent immigration court rulings have held that Fla. Stat. 812.014(2)(c)(1) [grand theft] (petty theft included) is not a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT), if the record of conviction (modified categorical approach) can not establish whether Respondent was convicted for temporary or permanent deprivation and appropriation. Further, retail theft (shoplifting) under Fla. Stat. 812.014 is not a CIMT and that Matter of Jurado-Degado 24 I&N Dec. 29, 33 (BIA 2006) is not applicable to the Florida statute. If the respondent is only removable/inadmissible for the Fla. theft offense, termination of the case may be appropriate. Further, these Fla. theft charges should not trigger stop-time rule for cancellation of removal purposes, and may not constitute aggravated felonies (even if 1 year of imprisonment). See attached file for sample motion to terminate. 
1 Comment
Dee wi
9/1/2015 03:53:36 am
So what does this really mean ? Does it mean a person who has this crime (Fla. Stat. 812.014(2)(c)(1)) on their record cannot be deemed inadmissible when entering the country no matter how many instances of the crime has occurred if this is the only type of crime on their record ? Does it mean a person with this crime on their record can apply for citizenship if they meet all other requirements ? Leave a Reply. |
AuthorJames C. Tai, Esq. 
Categories
All
|
||
