Hernandez-Perez

MEMORANDUM *

Raquel Hernandez-Perez, a Mexican national, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) order affirming the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) determination that because Hernandez-Perez was previously convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, she is ineligible for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , and we grant the petition.

Hernandez-Perez pled guilty in 2005 to violating Oregon Revised Statute § 165.022, criminal possession of a forged instrument in the first degree, which prohibits the possession of a forged instrument, including a public record such as the forged resident alien card, “knowing it to be forged and with intent to utter same.” Or.Rev.Stat. § 165.022; see id. § 165.013. We conclude that § 165.022 is not categorically a crime of moral turpitude, because the “intent to ... defraud” is not a necessary element of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the first degree. Rather, Oregon has explicitly provided that uttering a forged instrument “with intent to defraud” is punishable as forgery. Compare Or.Rev.Stat. § 165.022, with Or. Rev.Stat. §§ 165.007(1) (“A person commits the crime of…

dissenting:

I dissent because an intent to defraud is inherent in the use of a forged identification. See, e.g., Winestock v. INS, 576 F.2d 234, 235 (9th Cir.1978). No matter how Hernandez-Perez used the false identification — whether to prove her lawful residence in this country or to buy beer — she was misrepresenting her identity to those who received the forged temporary resident alien card. Just as passing counterfeit notes into circulation dilutes the value of the genuine article and undercuts faith in the currency, utilizing a forged identification undermines the efficacy of the identification regime. See, e.g., In re Flores, 17 I. & N. Dec. 225, 229 (1980).