At issue in this appeal was the petitioner's 2006 conviction under Fla. Stat. § 893.13(1)(a)(1). Both parties agreed that, of the six discrete alternative elements outlined in § 893.13(1)(a)(1), the “sale” element formed the basis of the petitioner's conviction. The Court agreed with the Board of Immigration Appeals' determination in Matter of L-G-H- that the illicit trafficking definition of a drug trafficking aggravated felony does not require knowledge of the illicit nature of the substance trafficked. Accordingly, the petitioner's conviction qualified as an aggravated felony.
The full text of Choizilme v. Attorney General can be found here:
http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201513845.pdf