United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2009-12-30
Case and law context
Role: comparator; posture: immigration (civil) petition for review; IJ and BIA held a Texas felon-in-possession conviction (Tex. Penal Code 46.04(a)) to be an INA aggravated felony as an offense "described in" 922(g)(1) (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(E)(ii)), making the alien ineligible for cancellation of removal; petition denied; 922(g)(1) is the federal yardstick, not the statute of conviction; result: claimant-won; claim: (g)(1)
Instances and excluded annotation blocks
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Variant | Exact source quotations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| /f3d/592/0681-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2009 | Possession in or affecting commerce | not_reached Excluded from merits counts comparator / merits claim: (g)(1); count: Texas offense of conviction, Tex. Penal Code 46.04(a); theory: categorical comparison of the state offense to 922(g)(1): the jurisdictional element is disregarded; subject: count=Texas offense of conviction, Tex. Penal Code 46.04(a); theory=categorical comparison of the state offense to 922(g)(1): the jurisdictional element is disregarded REAL RULING: a construction of the INA phrase "described in" (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(E)(ii)) - the 922(g)(1) commerce element is merely jurisdictional and is disregarded in the comparison, so a state offense need not have it. That the Texas offense has no commerce element was undisputed (the fact line), but the court does not hold the commerce element unsatisfied or failed; it holds the mismatch irrelevant, and the Government prevailed. Nothing is decided about any firearm's movement in commerce; hence not-reached. | categorical-match/state-offense-lacks-jurisdictional-element | Specifically, he argued that his conviction under TPC § 46.04(a) was not an aggravated felony as “described in” 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) because TPC § 46.04(a) did not contain an interstate commerce element, whereas § 922(g)(1) did.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_592.jsonl#/f3d/592/0681-01; Unicode character offsets [2193:2422] (end exclusive); SHA-256 43af4e91a7ab3d7b0cad29056b92bb9e454fbd4cf5c3cd0f3ae4ce572c98f62f.Because § 922(g)(l)’s interstate commerce element is simply an element that ensures federal jurisdiction, finding that such an element is necessary for a state offense to be one that is “described in” § 922(g)(1) would undermine Congress’s evident intent that jurisdiction be disregarded in applying this definition of “aggravated felony.”Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_592.jsonl#/f3d/592/0681-01; Unicode character offsets [6755:7094] (end exclusive); SHA-256 43af4e91a7ab3d7b0cad29056b92bb9e454fbd4cf5c3cd0f3ae4ce572c98f62f.We hold that state felon-in-possession offenses, such as TPC § 46.04(a), need not have an interstate commerce element in order for the offense to be an offense “described in” 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_592.jsonl#/f3d/592/0681-01; Unicode character offsets [3279:3476] (end exclusive); SHA-256 43af4e91a7ab3d7b0cad29056b92bb9e454fbd4cf5c3cd0f3ae4ce572c98f62f. |
| /f3d/592/0681-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2009 | Actual or constructive possession | satisfied Excluded from merits counts comparator / merits basis: conceded; claim: (g)(1); count: Texas offense of conviction, Tex. Penal Code 46.04(a); theory: categorical comparison of the state offense to 922(g)(1): substantive elements; subject: count=Texas offense of conviction, Tex. Penal Code 46.04(a); theory=categorical comparison of the state offense to 922(g)(1): substantive elements Same concession; the opinion says nothing about how or what the petitioner possessed. | categorical-match/state-felon-in-possession-offense | TPC § 46.04(a) has two elements that are relevant to this decision: (1) prior felony conviction and (2) possession, of a firearm.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_592.jsonl#/f3d/592/0681-01; Unicode character offsets [13683:13812] (end exclusive); SHA-256 43af4e91a7ab3d7b0cad29056b92bb9e454fbd4cf5c3cd0f3ae4ce572c98f62f.Nieto concedes in his brief that TPC § 46.04(a)’s two elements correspond with 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(l)'s first two elements.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_592.jsonl#/f3d/592/0681-01; Unicode character offsets [13963:14085] (end exclusive); SHA-256 43af4e91a7ab3d7b0cad29056b92bb9e454fbd4cf5c3cd0f3ae4ce572c98f62f. |
| /f3d/592/0681-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2009 | Conviction punishable by more than one year | satisfied Excluded from merits counts comparator / merits basis: conceded; claim: (g)(1); count: Texas offense of conviction, Tex. Penal Code 46.04(a); theory: categorical comparison of the state offense to 922(g)(1): substantive elements; subject: count=Texas offense of conviction, Tex. Penal Code 46.04(a); theory=categorical comparison of the state offense to 922(g)(1): substantive elements Element-to-element correspondence conceded by the petitioner; not a finding about his own prior felony (a 1997 Texas marijuana conviction, mentioned only as the ground of removability). | categorical-match/state-felon-in-possession-offense | TPC § 46.04(a) has two elements that are relevant to this decision: (1) prior felony conviction and (2) possession, of a firearm.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_592.jsonl#/f3d/592/0681-01; Unicode character offsets [13683:13812] (end exclusive); SHA-256 43af4e91a7ab3d7b0cad29056b92bb9e454fbd4cf5c3cd0f3ae4ce572c98f62f.18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) has three relevant elements: (1) prior felony conviction; (2) possession of a firearm; and (3) interstate commerce requirement.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_592.jsonl#/f3d/592/0681-01; Unicode character offsets [13813:13962] (end exclusive); SHA-256 43af4e91a7ab3d7b0cad29056b92bb9e454fbd4cf5c3cd0f3ae4ce572c98f62f.Nieto concedes in his brief that TPC § 46.04(a)’s two elements correspond with 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(l)'s first two elements.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_592.jsonl#/f3d/592/0681-01; Unicode character offsets [13963:14085] (end exclusive); SHA-256 43af4e91a7ab3d7b0cad29056b92bb9e454fbd4cf5c3cd0f3ae4ce572c98f62f. |