Summary
The Fifth Circuit held that a signed plea agreement form, stamped as filed by the deputy clerk, constitutes clear and convincing evidence of a conviction for removal purposes even without a judge's signature. The court rejected the petitioner's argument that a judge's signature is required under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(48)(A)'s definition of "conviction," distinguishing its prior decision in *Singh v. Holder* and noting that 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(3)(B) lists several acceptable proof documents that do not necessarily bear a judge's signature. The petition for review of a removal order based on a forgery conviction (a crime involving moral turpitude) was denied.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a plea agreement form that lacks a judge's signature constitutes clear and convincing evidence of a conviction under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(48)(A) and § 1229a(c)(3)(B).
Holdings
- A signed, stamped, and filed plea agreement form, even without a judge's signature, can serve as clear and convincing evidence of a conviction under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Key quotations
“we hold that it can serve as clear and convincing evidence of a conviction” (at 2)
“It is not, as a matter of law, deficient or inadmissible.” (at 6)
Factual background
Nguyen, a lawful permanent resident from Vietnam, was convicted of forgery in California after pleading guilty. The plea agreement form, signed by Nguyen, his counsel, the prosecutor, and the deputy clerk, and stamped as filed, but lacking a judge's signature, was used as evidence of the conviction. DHS initiated removal proceedings, and the immigration judge ordered removal based on the conviction as a crime involving moral turpitude.
Procedural history
The immigration judge found Nguyen removable based on a forgery conviction and ordered removal. The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed. Nguyen filed a timely petition for review.