The conviction at issue in this case was unique enough that I thought the unpublished decision warranted a blog post.  Torres-Ledesma was convicted under Oklahoma law of "maintaining a dwelling where a controlled dangerous substance is kept."  The agency determined that his conviction qualified as an aggravated felony and a controlled substance violation.  The Tenth Circuit noted that the statute was divisible because it could be punished as a felony conviction or with a civil fine.  Only a felony conviction would have immigration consequences, and thus, the Tenth Circuit remanded to allow the Board of Immigration Appeals to conduct a modified categorical analysis.

How often do you find a criminal statute that explicitly permits punishment as a civil violation only? Probably more often than you realize, especially with so many states decriminalizing possession of marijuana, so keep it in mind when evaluating the immigration consequences of the "conviction."

The full text of Torres-Ledesma v. Lynch can be found here: