Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057 (9th Cir. 2000). · Go Syfert
Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057 (9th Cir. 2000). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, 2000–2018 · …ordinary, contemporary, and common meaning
62 citation events (57 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Adil Elmakhzoumi v. Jefferson Sessions (ca9, 2018-03-01)
Treatment trajectory · 2000 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2000 2013 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 24 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Adil Elmakhzoumi v. Jefferson Sessions
9th Cir. · 2018 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
the definition of rape under federal law simply has no bearing on whether petitioner's state conviction constitutes an 'aggravated felony' for purposes of establishing his deportability.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Gonzalez-Reyes (2×) also: Cited "see"
9th Cir. · 2026 · confidence medium
Ninth Circuit Jurisprudence The majority argues that our caselaw supports a broader generic federal definition of rape, citing Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057, 1059 (9th Cir. 2000) and United States v. Yanez-Saucedo, 295 F.3d 991 , 995–96 (9th Cir. 2002), which renders the generic federal definition a categorical match with California’s statutory rape provision.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Anjum Khan v. William Barr
9th Cir. · 2020 · confidence medium
Subsections (c), (d), and (e) of RCW § 9A.44.050(1) are overbroad, because they can be committed with consent and do not require that a person be “overcome by force or fear, or under other prohibitive conditions.” Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057, 1059 (9th Cir. 2000) (defining common law rape) (quoting Black’s Law Dictionary (6th ed.1990)); see also State v. Soderquist, 816 P.2d 1264, 1267 (Wash. Ct. App. 1991) (noting that subsection (c) “involve[s] a vulnerable victim and an abuse of trust”).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Jorge Contreras Pineda v. Jefferson Sessions
9th Cir. · 2017 · confidence medium
Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057, 1058-59 (9th Cir. 2000).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Juan Mendoza v. Holder
9th Cir. · 2012 · confidence medium
See, e.g., United States v. Yanez Saucedo, 295 F.3d 991, 995-96 (9th Cir.2002); Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057, 1059 (9th Cir.2000).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Sandoval (2×)
Wash. · 2011 · confidence medium
Further, although determining whether a state crime is a *1020 "rape" under federal immigration law is not always a simple matter, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals interprets the term "rape" in 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (a)(43)(A) "by `employing the ordinary, contemporary, and common meaning' of that word and then determin[ing] whether or not the conduct prohibited by [state law] falls within that common, everyday definition." Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057, 1059 (9th Cir.2000) (citation omitted) (quoting United States v. Baron-Medina, 187 F.3d 1144, 1146 (9th Cir.1999)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Sandoval (2×)
Wash. · 2011 · confidence medium
Further, although determining whether a state crime is a “rape” under federal immigration law is not always a simple matter, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals interprets the term “rape” in 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (a)(43)(A) “by ‘employing the ordinary, contemporary, and common meaning’ of that word and then determining] whether or not the conduct prohibited by [state law] falls within that common, everyday definition.” Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057, 1059 (9th Cir. 2000) (citation omitted) (quoting United States v. Baron-Medina, 187 F.3d 1144,1146 (9th Cir. 1999)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Rivas-Gomez v. Gonzales
9th Cir. · 2006 · confidence medium
See United States v. Yanez-Saucedo, 295 F.3d 991, 996 (9th Cir. 2002) (citing Black’s Law Dictionary for the contemporary definition of “rape”); Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057, 1059 (9th Cir. 2000) (same); United States v. Pallares-Galan, 359 F.3d at 1100 (defining “sexual abuse”).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Carlos Rene Rivas-Gomez v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General (2×)
9th Cir. · 2006 · confidence medium
See United States v. Yanez-Saucedo, 295 F.3d 991, 996 (9th Cir.2002) (citing Black's Law Dictionary for the contemporary definition of "rape"); Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057, 1059 (9th Cir.2000) (same); United States v. Pallares-Galan, 359 F.3d at 1100 (defining "sexual abuse").
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States Court of Appeals v. Jose Antonio Yanez-Saucedo
9th Cir. · 2002 · confidence medium
Force beyond the act of penetration was not an element of the offense in Castro-Baez, 217 F.3d at 1059 (explaining that rape under California law can be accomplished based on solely non-consensual sexual intercourse with a person whose ability to resist has been substantially impaired by drugs or other intoxicants).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Nawaiseh v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
9th Cir. · 2002 · confidence medium
See Aragon-Ayon v. INS, 206 F.3d 847, 849 (9th Cir.2000); Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057, 1058 (9th Cir.2000).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Gilda Altagracia Abreu-Reyes, A.K.A. Gilda A. Desmith v. Immigration and Naturalization Service (2×)
9th Cir. · 2002 · confidence medium
Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057, 1058 (9th Cir.2000) (citing 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(2)(C)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Valenzuela-Zamorano v. Ashcroft
9th Cir. · 2001 · confidence medium
Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057, 1058 (9th Cir.2000).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Lazaro D. Borrero v. INS
8th Cir. · 2000 · confidence medium
See 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(2)(C) (notwithstanding any other provision of law, no court has jurisdiction to review any final order of removal against alien who is removable by reason of having committed criminal offense covered in 8 U.S.C. §§ 1182 (a)(2), 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii), or 1227(a)(2)(B)); Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057, 1058-60 (9th Cir. 2000) (recognizing appellate court’s jurisdiction extends to deciding only whether alien had committed deportable offense under § 1252(a)(2)(C), and dismissing for lack of jurisdiction after concluding such offense had been committed); Diakite v. IN…
discussed Cited "see" Lazaro Vizcara-Ramirez v. Robert Wilkinson
9th Cir. · 2021 · signal: see · confidence high
See Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057 , 2 1059 (9th Cir. 2000) (The generic definition of rape requires “non-consensual sexual intercourse with a person.”). 3.
discussed Cited "see" KEELEY
unknown court · 2017 · signal: accord · confidence high
Consent Regarding the issue of consent, the parties do not dispute that a rape occurs when the relevant sexual act is “committed when the [victim’s] resistance is overcome by force or fear, or under other prohibitive conditions.” Black’s Law Dictionary 1260 (6th ed. 1990) (emphasis added); accord Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057, 1059 (9th Cir. 2000).
cited Cited "see" Salvador Espinoza-Gonzalez v. Eric Holder, Jr.
9th Cir. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
See Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057, 1059 (9th Cir.2000); see also United States v. Yanez-Saucedo, 295 F.3d 991, 995 (9th Cir.2002).
cited Cited "see" Murrin v. Hanson (In re Murrin)
D. Minnesota · 2012 · signal: see · confidence high
See Liberty Tool, & Mfg. v. Vortex Fishing Sys., Inc. (In re Vortex Fishing Sys., Inc.), 217 F.3d 1057, 1072 (9th Cir.2002); Concrete Pumping Serv., Inc. v. King Constr.
discussed Cited "see" Javier Ramon Lopez-Molina v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General (2×)
9th Cir. · 2004 · signal: see · confidence high
See Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057, 1058 n. 2 (9th Cir.2000).
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Landeros-Vargas
9th Cir. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Castro- Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057, 1058-59 (9th Cir.2000) (applying the analysis set forth in United States v. Baron-Medina, 187 F.3d 1144, 1146-47 (9th Cir.1999), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1167 , 121 S.Ct. 1130 , 148 L.Ed.2d 996 (2001), to conclude that a prior rape conviction under CaLPenal Code § 261(a)(3) (1996) constituted an “aggravated felony” for sentencing purposes).
cited Cited "see" Toledo-Castillo v. Ashcroft
9th Cir. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057, 1058 (9th Cir.2000).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Bertan-Manguia
9th Cir. · 2007 · signal: compare · confidence low
Compare Ivory, 475 F.3d at 1235 (explaining that, under Eleventh Circuit precedent, the crime of “simple battery” has “as an element, the use or attempted use of 6886 UNITED STATES v. BELTRAN-MUNGUIA Like in Yanez-Saucedo, in Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057 (9th Cir. 2000), it was also unnecessary to find force as a requisite element of the prior conviction.
cited Cited "see, e.g." Cruz-Aguilera v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
9th Cir. · 2001 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence medium
See, e.g., Castro-Baez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057, 1059-60 (9th Cir.2000) (concluding that petitioner fell within the scope of INA § 242(a)(2)(C), and dismissing petition).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Juan Antonio Cruz-Aguilera,petitioner-Appellant v. Immigration and Naturalization Service,respondent-Appellee
9th Cir. · 2001 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., CastroBaez v. Reno, 217 F.3d 1057 , 1059-60 (9th Cir. 2000) (concluding that petitioner fell within the scope of INAS 242(a) (2)(C), and dismissing petition). 8 In his appeal to this court, Cruz-Aguilera requested that we convert his petition for review to a petition for writ of habeas corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Manuel Castro-Baez
v.
Janet Reno, Attorney General Doris Meissner, Ins Commissioner Immigration and Naturalization Service Executive Office for Immigration Review, Board of Immigration Appeals
99-70484.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Jun 30, 2000.
217 F.3d 1057
2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5360
2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 15313
Cited by 15 opinions  |  Published

217 F.3d 1057 (9th Cir. 2000)

MANUEL CASTRO-BAEZ, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
JANET RENO, Attorney General; DORIS MEISSNER, INS Commissioner; IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE; Executive Office for Immigration Review, Board of Immigration Appeals, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 99-70484

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Submitted June 23, 2000[1]
Filed June 30, 2000

Lamar Peckham, Santa Rosa, California, for the petitioner.

Robert S. Mueller, III and Robert Yeargin, San Francisco, California; and Richard Evans and Marion Guyton, Washington, D.C., for the respondent.

Petition to Review a Decision of the Immigration and Naturalization Service; INS No. Avb-kgu-mvp

Before: Betty B. Fletcher, Michael Daly Hawkins and Sidney R. Thomas, Circuit Judges.

THOMAS, Circuit Judge:

[*~1057]1

This petition for review requires us to decide whether a rape conviction under Cal. Penal Code S 261 constitutes an "aggravated felony" within the meaning ofS 101(a)(43)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act ("INA"), 8 U.S.C. S 1101(a)(43)(A). We conclude that it does.

2

* Castro-Baez, a native and citizen of Mexico, entered the United States in 1978 and has been a lawful permanent resident since 1989. In 1996, he was convicted of rape in violation of Cal. Penal Code S 261(a)(3). Two years later, on April 13, 1998, the INS charged Castro-Baez with being deportable as an alien convicted of an aggravated felony under S 237(a) (2)(A)(iii) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. S 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii). The charge was based upon his state rape conviction. On October 2, 1998, an immigration judge found Castro-Baez's rape conviction to be a deportable offense, ordered him removed from the United States, and pretermitted his application for discretionary cancellation of removal.

[*~1058]3

Following an unsuccessful appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA"), Castro-Baez filed with this Court a timely petition for review of the BIA's decision. He claims he is not deportable because his state rape conviction does not qualify as an "aggravated felony" within the meaning of S 101(a)(43)(A) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. S 1101(a)(43)(A). We have jurisdiction to decide whether Castro-Baez has committed a deportable offense, see Flores-Miramontes v. INS, 212 F.3d 1133, 1135-36 (9th Cir. May 9, 2000), but must dismiss his petition for lack of jurisdiction if we conclude that he has[2]. See INA S 242(a)(2)(C), 8 U.S.C. S 1252(a)(2)(C). Because we conclude that CastroBaez's rape conviction qualifies as an aggravated felony under the INA, we dismiss his petition for review.

II

4

Castro-Baez challenges the BIA's conclusion that a "rape" under California state law constitutes the "aggravated felony" of "rape" within the meaning of the INA. He claims that because the elements of rape under the federal sexual abuse laws are not necessarily coterminous with the elements of rape under California state law, his rape conviction under Cal. Penal Code S 261 cannot be a deportable offense. We reject his argument because it is directly at odds with the plain language of the INA and irreconcilable with our decision in United States v. Baron-Medina, 187 F.3d 1144 (9th Cir. 1999).

[*~1059]5

Under S 237(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the INA, "[a]ny alien who is convicted of an aggravated felony at any time after admission is deportable." 8 U.S.C. S 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii). As used in that section, an "aggravatedfelony" includes "rape." 8 U.S.C. S 1101(a)(43)(A). Although the term "rape " itself is not further defined by the INA, the term encompasses convictions obtained under either federal or state law. Id . S 1101(a)(43) ("The term [aggravated felony] applies to an offense described in this paragraph whether in violation of Federal or State law[.]"). Thus, the definition of rape under federal law simply has no bearing on whether Castro-Baez's state conviction constitutes an "aggravated felony" for purposes of establishing his deportability.

6

Furthermore, we have already rejected Castro-Baez's argument in a case interpreting the very same statutory provision at issue here. See Baron-Medina, 187 F.3d at 1146 ("As a threshold matter, we reject any suggestion that the federal sexual abuse laws, codified at Chapter 109A of the United States Code, limit the class of state laws reached by the term."). In Baron-Medina, we faced the issue of whether a conviction under Cal. Penal Code S 288(a), which prohibits lewd or lascivious acts on children under age 14, qualified as "sexual abuse of a minor" and, hence, an "aggravated felony" within the meaning of the INA. See id. We held that it did, reasoning that because Congress had placed the crime of "sexual abuse of a minor" in S 1101(a)(43)(A) "in the company of two other crimes -murder and rape -traditionally proscribed by state law, without cross-referencing Chapter 109A or any other federal statute," Congress could not have intended for federal law to govern the definition of that crime. Id. We see no reason to apply a different analysis here. Thus, the determination of whether Castro-Baez's state rape conviction constitutes a deportable offense cannot depend on the elements of a distinct federal offense.

7

Rather, as outlined in Baron-Medina, we must define the term rape by "employing the ordinary, contemporary, and common meaning" of that word and then determine whether or not the conduct prohibited by Cal. Penal CodeS 261(a)(3) falls within that common, everyday definition. Id. In so doing, we "look solely to the statutory definition of the crime, not to the name given to the offense or to the underlying circumstances of the predicate conviction." Id. Here, we conclude that the conduct reached by S 261(a)(3) plainly and indisputably falls within the common usage of the term rape.

8

Under California law, rape is defined as "an act of sexual intercourse accomplished with a person not the spouse of the perpetrator," under any of seven specifically enumerated circumstances. Cal. Penal Code S 261(a)(1)-(7). Castro-Baez was convicted under the third listed scenario, "[w]here a person is prevented from resisting by any intoxicating or anesthetic substance, or any controlled substance, and this condition was known, or reasonably should have been known by the accused." Id. S 261(a)(3). In ordinary usage, rape is understood to include the act of engaging in non-consensual sexual intercourse with a person whose ability to resist has been substantially impaired by drugs or other intoxicants. See, e.g., Black's Law Dictionary (6th ed. 1990) (defining rape as the "act of sexual intercourse committed by a man with a woman not his wife and without her consent, committed when the woman's resistance is overcome by force or fear, or under other prohibitive conditions"). Therefore, there is no doubt that the conduct proscribed by S 261(a)(3) falls within the "ordinary, contemporary, and common" understanding of the term rape. Consequently, Castro-Baez's offense rendered him deportable as an alien convicted of an aggravated felony.

III

9

In sum, a rape conviction under Cal. Penal CodeS 261 qualifies as an aggravated felony for purposes of establishing an alien's deportability under S 237(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. S 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii). Accordingly, we dismissCastro-Baez's petition for review for want of jurisdiction.

PETITION DISMISSED

Notes:

1

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

2

The permanent rules of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, Pub. L. No. 104-208, 110 Stat. 3009 (Sept. 30, 1996), as amended, Pub. L. No. 104-302, 110 Stat. 3656 (Oct. 11, 1996), apply to this case because removal proceedings were initiated after April 1, 1997. See Ratnam v. INS, 154 F.3d 990, 993 n.1 (9th Cir. 1998).