Peterson

MEMORANDUM **

After Joseph Peterson was convicted of attempting to possess a stolen vehicle, an *867 order of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (a)(2)(A)(iii) was issued against him. We grant his petition for review.

Peterson’s 1998 conviction does not constitute an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (a)(43). Peterson was convicted of attempted violation of Utah Code Ann. § 41 -la-1316, which contained sub-parts that do not require the requisite criminal intent of a qualifying theft offense. See United States v. Corona-Sanchez, 291 F.3d 1201, 1205 (9th Cir.2002) (defining theft offense). Therefore, the full range of conduct prohibited by the statute did not constitute a theft offense within the meaning of 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (a)(43)(G). See Huerta-Guevara v. Ashcroft, 321 F.3d 883, 887 (9th Cir.2003); United States v. Perez-Corona, 295 F.3d 996, 1001 (9th Cir.2002). Because Utah Code Ann. § 41 -la-1316 is not a theft offense under § 1101(a)(43)(G), it is not a described offense for purposes of § 1101(a)(43)(U), so a conviction for attempted violation of § 41-la-1316 does not qualify as an aggravated felony, either.

Because Peterson is not removable on the basis of his 1998…