Martinez-Perez
Martinez-Perez v. Ashcroft
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
To be eligible for cancellation of removal, an alien must have “resided in the United States continuously for 7 years after having been admitted in any status ...” 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a)(2). However, § 1229b(d)(l) sets forth a stop-time provision, which provides that any period of continuous residence shall be “deemed to end” when the alien commits an offense that renders him inadmissible or removable. See also Barahona-Gomez v. Reno, 167 F.3d 1228, 1232 (9th Cir.1999), (recognizing that the continuous physical presence requirement ends upon the commission of a qualifying offense), supplemented on other grounds by 236 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir.2001).
Martinez-Perez was convicted of grand theft in 1989. This conviction ended his period of continuous presence because it was a crime of moral turpitude that rendered Martinez-Perez inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (a)(2). See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(d)(l); see also Rashtabadi v. I.N.S., 23 F.3d 1562, 1568 (9th Cir.1994) (recognizing grand theft as a crime of moral turpitude and an offense rendering the alien excludable); see also Matter of Perez, 22 I & N Dec. 689 (BIA1999) (holding that § 1229b(d)(l) did not have a retroactive effect…