At page 285 The BIA was also correct in not considering the Florida expungement statute because this court, other courts of appeals, and the BIA have expressly held that the term ‘convicted’ in the [INA] must be interpreted in accordance with federal standards.4 citing cases
- Wilson v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 43 F.3d 211 (5th Cir. 1995).published(The BIA was also correct in not considering the Florida expungement statute because this court, other courts of appeals, and the BIA have expressly held that the term ‘convicted’ in the [INA] must be interpreted in acc…)
- United States v. Ramon Escobar, 4 F.3d 986 (4th Cir. 1993).unpublishedThe Dickerson Court also noted that "one cannot be placed on probation if the court does not deem him to be guilty of a crime." Dickerson, 460 U.S. at 113-14 . 6 For immigration purposes, a conviction occurs when either a court entered a f…
- Jose Luis Yanez-Popp v. U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., Am. Immigr. Lawyers Ass'n, Amicus Curiae, 998 F.2d 231 (4th Cir. 1993).publishedSee Molina v. INS, 981 F.2d 14, 19 (1st Cir.1992) (“The federal Constitution permits Congress to condition its immigration law upon the absence of a ‘conviction’ as federally de fined”); Kolios v. INS, 532 F.2d 786, 789 (1st Cir.), cert. d…
- Geilher Molina v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 981 F.2d 14 (1st Cir. 1992).publishedSee Pino v. London, 349 U.S. 901 , 75 S.Ct. 576 , 99 L.Ed. 1239 (1955) (holding that the federal immigration law word “conviction” requires “finality” despite state law precedent suggesting the contrary); see also Yazdchi v. INS, 878 F.2d…
At page 284 Florida procedure of withholding adjudication of guilt and imposition of sentence but placement of defendant on probation was “conviction” for immigration purposes under Ozkok3 citing cases
- United States v. Samaei, 260 F. Supp. 2d 1223 (M.D. Fla. 2003).publishedChong v. INS, 890 F.2d 284, 284-85 (11th Cir. 1989). 11 .
- Wazirali Moosa, Also Known as Wazir Ali Haider Ali Moosa Zebunisa Wazirali Moosa v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 171 F.3d 994 (5th Cir. 1999).published(Florida procedure of withholding adjudication of guilt and imposition of sentence but placement of defendant on probation was “conviction” for immigration purposes under Ozkok)
- Wazirali Moosa, Also Known as Wazir Ali Haider Ali Moosa; Zebunisa Wazirali Moosa v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv..published(Florida procedure of withholding adjudication of guilt and imposition of sentence but placement of defendant on probation was “conviction” for immigration purposes under Ozkok)
v.
IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent
While on permanent resident status in the United States, the petitioner, Tyrone Oliver Chong, left the country. Upon his reentry, Customs agents discovered three pounds of marijuana concealed in his belongings. The state of Florida prosecuted Chong in its courts. Pursuant to Florida Statute 948.01(3), the state court withheld adjudication of guilt and imposition of sentence, but placed Chong on probation for six months.
The issue is: whether the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) correctly held that Chong had been “convicted” within the meaning of the immigration laws of the United States. Conviction of a felony is a ground for deportation.
The BIA properly held that the petitioner was “convicted” within the meaning of section 241(a)(ll) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1251(a)(ll), although the state court or[*285] dered that the adjudication of the petitioner’s guilt be withheld. The petitioner clearly meets the standards set forth by the BIA in Matter of Ozkok, Interim Decision 3044 (BIA 1988), and thus has been “convicted” for immigration purposes. The BIA was also correct in not considering the Florida expungement statute because this court, other courts of appeals, and the BIA have expressly held that the term “convicted” in the Act must be interpreted in accordance with federal standards. Gonzalez de Lara v. United States, 439 F.2d 1316 (5th Cir.1971).
AFFIRMED.