Summary
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Benjamin Sandoval Diaz’s petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals decision affirming the denial of cancellation of removal. The court held that Diaz’s sworn admissions before an immigration judge, made with counsel present while he bore the burden of proving eligibility for relief, were valid and were sufficient to establish admissions to controlled-substance offenses. The court rejected Diaz’s arguments under Matter of K- and his contention that the record failed to establish that the substance involved was cocaine; Judge Harris dissented.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Board of Immigration Appeals and Immigration Judge violated Matter of K- by relying on Diaz's admissions without first explaining the essential elements of the North Carolina drug offenses.
- Whether Diaz's sworn testimony established that he admitted committing acts constituting violations of North Carolina's controlled-substance law involving cocaine.
- Whether Diaz was statutorily barred from cancellation of removal because his admissions established that he was a person described in 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(II), and therefore could not establish good moral character under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(f)(3).
Holdings
- Matter of K- was materially distinguishable and inapplicable because Diaz's admissions were made voluntarily, under oath, in an application for relief for which he bore the burden of proof, while represented by counsel whose presence and opportunity to object provided procedural safeguards.
- Diaz's sworn testimony established that he obtained, possessed, sold, and delivered cocaine, and his testimony was sufficient to establish the relevant drug-related conduct without a separate chemical analysis.
- Diaz was statutorily barred from establishing good moral character and therefore was ineligible for cancellation of removal because he admitted committing acts constituting violations of a state law relating to a controlled substance.
Key quotations
“As the BIA Decision explained, and consistent with the various material distinctions explained above, Diaz’s circumstances fail to implicate the “fair play” and “unwitting entrapment” concerns identified by Matter of K.” (16)
“Diaz’s claim that cocaine was not admittedly involved in his felony drug offenses — in view of the IJ’s findings and the applicable burden of proof — serve to further undermine an effort to prove his “good moral character.”” (17)
Factual background
Diaz, a Mexican citizen who unlawfully entered the United States in 1997, was indicted in North Carolina for possession of cocaine with intent to deliver, sale of cocaine, and delivery of cocaine. The charges were dismissed in 2017 in exchange for his cooperation with prosecutors. During sworn testimony in his cancellation-of-removal proceedings, while represented by counsel and without objection, Diaz admitted obtaining, possessing, selling, and delivering three and one-half grams of cocaine. The Immigration Judge and BIA concluded that these admissions established conduct making Diaz unable to satisfy the statutory good-moral-character requirement.
Procedural history
The Department of Homeland Security initiated removal proceedings against Diaz in 2015 based on his unlawful presence. Diaz conceded removability and applied for cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b). The Immigration Judge denied relief in 2019 after finding that Diaz had admitted committing North Carolina felony drug offenses and therefore could not establish good moral character. The Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed Diaz's appeal in 2023, and the Fourth Circuit denied his petition for review.