Matter of Carlos Manuel BAEZA-GALINDO

29 I. & N. Dec. 1 (BIA 2025) · Board of Immigration Appeals · January 31, 2025 · No. ID 4085

Summary

This Board of Immigration Appeals decision clarifies the legal standard for determining whether two convictions for crimes involving moral turpitude arise from a "single scheme of criminal misconduct" under the Immigration and Nationality Act. The Board establishes that while temporal proximity between offenses is relevant, it is neither necessary nor sufficient to establish a single scheme; separate acts with distinct objectives constitute separate schemes. Applying this framework, the Board reverses the Immigration Judge's termination of removal proceedings against a respondent convicted of aggravated assault and failing to stop after a fatal DUI crash.

Court
Board of Immigration Appeals
Writing for the Court
Goodwin; Petty; Clark
Jurisdiction
United States
Decision date
January 31, 2025
Docket number
ID 4085
Procedural posture
Appeal from Immigration Judge's termination of removal proceedings
Standard of review
de novo
Precedential value
published
Parties
Department of Homeland Security v. Carlos Manuel BAEZA-GALINDO
Disposition
reversed

Topics

removal proceedingsimmigrationstatutory interpretationcriminal immigrationdeportation

Practice areas

immigration

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the respondent's two convictions arise out of a single scheme of criminal misconduct under INA §237(a)(2)(A)(ii)

Holdings

  1. Proximity in time is necessary but not sufficient; two crimes involving moral turpitude premised on separate acts with different objectives constitute separate schemes of criminal misconduct, making the respondent removable.

Key quotations

Proximity in time is necessary but not sufficient to conclude that two crimes arise from a single scheme of criminal misconduct. (1)
Two crimes involving moral turpitude, premised on separate turpitudinous acts with different objectives, neither of which was committed in the course of accomplishing the other, constitute separate schemes of criminal misconduct. (2)

Factual background

Carlos Manuel Baeza-Galindo, a lawful permanent resident, was convicted in Texas of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and failure to stop and render aid after driving under the influence and striking a group of pedestrians, killing one and injuring three others.

Procedural history

The Immigration Judge terminated removal proceedings on the ground that the respondent's two convictions arose from a single scheme of criminal misconduct. DHS appealed.

Remand instructions

The record is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion and for the entry of a new decision.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…