Herrera-Inirio v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an alien’s guilty plea and the service of probation to charges of spousal abuse entered under Puerto Rican law constituted a conviction for immigration purposes, since the language of Section 101(a)(48)(A) “leaves nothing to the imagination”
• holding that § 1101(a)(48)(A) passes rational basis review in the context of a substantive due process challenge because it advances “the government’s need for a nationally uniform definition of the term ‘conviction’ for immigration purposes”
• holding that an alien’s guilty plea and the service of probation to charges of spousal abuse entered under Puerto Rican law constituted a conviction for immigration purposes, since the language of Section 101(a)(48)(A) “leaves nothing to the imagination”
• explaining that Matter of Ozkok “failed to produce . . . uniformity and Congress stepped in to fill the void”
• noting that the BIA was “[f]rustrated by the crazy quilt of anomalous results that flowed from widely disparate state rehabilitative and diversionary arrangements”
• noting that Congress enacted section 101(a)(48)(A) of the Act “to produce the desired uniformity” in the definition of a “conviction”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).