EDUARDO ENRIQUEZ V. ROBERT WILKINSON, No. 13-72934 (9th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on August 13, 2020.
Download PDF
FILED FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 1 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT EDUARDO J. ENRIQUEZ, AKA Eduardo Jobanny Enriquez, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 13-72934 Agency No. A095-465-235 Petitioner, v. ORDER ROBERT M. WILKINSON, Acting Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submission Deferred April 3, 2020 Submitted August 6, 2020* Pasadena, California Before: Kim McLane Wardlaw, Mary H. Murguia, and Eric D. Miller, Circuit Judges. Respondent’s unopposed motion to remand (Dkt. No. 74) is GRANTED. We REMAND this case to the Board of Immigration Appeals for reconsideration of whether Petitioner’s conviction under Cal. Penal Code § 136.1(a)(2) constitutes a crime of moral turpitude. We WITHDRAW our previously filed opinion in this * The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). case, Enriquez v. Barr, 969 F.3d 1057 (9th Cir. 2020), and DENY Petitioner’s petition for rehearing en banc (Dkt. No. 64) as moot. Petitioner’s order of removal is STAYED pending a new final decision by the BIA and any decision of this Court on a subsequent petition for review, should one be filed. Each party shall bear its own costs of appeal. This order constitutes the mandate of this court. IT IS SO ORDERED. 2
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.
