Murillo-Prado v. Holder, Jr., No. 09-72034 (9th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CasePetitioner, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitioned for review of the BIA's decision finding him ineligible for removal because his conviction for racketeering under Arizona law constituted an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(J). The language in the indictment, plea agreement, and sentencing order was clear and convincing evidence that petitioner was convicted of an offense coming within the definition of "aggravated felony." Accordingly, the court dismissed the petition, concluding that the BIA did not err in determining that the Arizona conviction constituted an aggravated felony and that petitioner was ineligible for cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. 1229b.
Court Description: Immigration. The panel dismissed for lack of jurisdiction Jose Luis Murillo-Prado’s petition for review from the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision finding that his conviction for illegally conducting an enterprise, in violation of Arizona Revised Statute § 13-2301, constituted a racketeering aggravated felony. Applying the modified categorical approach because the definition of racketeering under Arizona law is divisible, the panel held that the indictment, plea agreement, and sentencing order provided clear and convincing evidence that Murillo-Prado was convicted of a racketeering aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(J), and that he was thus ineligible for cancellation of removal.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.