Periana v. New York State Division of Human Rights

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that in light of the language and legislative purpose of the definition of a “conviction” at section 101(a)(48
• explaining that the BIA will “not look behind the state court judgment to ascertain whether the court acted in accordance with its own law in vacating the conviction”
• discussing the circumstances under which a vacated conviction is no longer a conviction for immigration purposes
• distinguishing convictions that have been set aside for reasons related to a defect in the underlying criminal proceedings, which are not final for immigration purposes, from those vacated because of rehabilitation or immigration hardship
• affirming removal on basis of quashed conviction where “quashing of the conviction was not based on a defect in the conviction or in the proceedings underlying the conviction, but instead appears to have been entered solely for immigration purposes”
• “If, however, a court vacates a conviction for reasons unrelated to the merits of the underlying criminal proceedings, the respondent remains ‘convicted’ for immigration purposes.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).