Yznn Yrastorza v. Loretta E. Lynch , 636 F. App'x 959 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION
    FEB 12 2016
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    YZNN LOUIS YRASTORZA,                            No. 13-71033
    Petitioner,                        Agency No. A074-545-505
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted February 10, 2016**
    Pasadena, California
    Before: KLEINFELD, McKEOWN, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
    Yznn Yrastorza petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’
    (BIA) decision that he is removable as an alien convicted of an aggravated felony
    theft offense. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101(a)(43)(G), 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii). We have
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    jurisdiction to review Yrastorza’s legal and constitutional claims under 8 U.S.C.
    § 1252(a)(2)(D).
    The BIA did not err in holding that Yrastorza’s Nevada conviction for
    larceny from the person, Nev. Rev. Stat. § 205.270, qualified as an aggravated
    felony theft offense under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(G). The BIA correctly
    determined that the elements of section 205.270 of the Nevada Revised Statutes
    criminalize the same or lesser conduct as the federal generic theft offense, see
    United States v. Corona-Sanchez, 
    291 F.3d 1201
    , 1205 (9th Cir. 2002) (en banc),
    because in Nevada the “intent to steal” means “the specific intent to permanently
    deprive the owner of his property,” Harvey v. State, 
    375 P.2d 225
    , 226 (Nev.
    1962); see also Grant v. State, 
    24 P.3d 761
    , 766 (Nev. 2001).
    We have defined “theft offense” for purposes of § 1101(a)(43)(G), see
    
    Corona-Sanchez, 291 F.3d at 1205
    , and the word “theft” has an accepted common
    law definition, 
    id. Therefore, the
    definition of aggravated felony as including a
    “theft offense” is not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad. See Johnson v.
    United States, 
    135 S. Ct. 2551
    , 2556 (2015).
    PETITION DENIED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-71033

Citation Numbers: 636 F. App'x 959

Judges: Kleinfeld, Mekeown, Ikuta

Filed Date: 2/12/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024