Ninth Circuit Determines that Oregon Conviction for Unlawful Use of a Weapon is not Crime of Violence

The Ninth Circuit has determined that an Oregon conviction for unlawful use of a weapon, even when coupled with an enhancement that specifies the weapon is a firearm, is not a crime of violence because it does not have as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of another.

“ The firearm enhancement statute applies to ‘the use or threatened use of a firearm, whether operable or inoperable, by a defendant during the commission of a felony.’ Although this language requires the use or threatened use of a firearm, it does not, on its face, require the use or threatened use of a firearm ‘against the person of another.’”

The full text of United States v. Keast can be found here:

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2025/09/10/24-1253.pdf

Ninth Circuit Finds Oregon Conviction for First Degree Criminal Mistreatment is CIMT and Oregon Conviction for Unlawful Possession of Weapon is Firearms Offense

The Ninth Circuit has determined that an Oregon conviction for first degree criminal mistreatment is a crime involving moral turpitude because it requires knowingly depriving a dependent of basic care.

The Court also found that an Oregon conviction for unlawful possession of a weapon is overbroad as compared to a deportable firearms offense because the statute criminalizes possession of antique firearms. However, the statute is divisible between various subsections, some of which do not involve antique firearms. These subsections match the definition of a deportabel firearms offense.

The Court also overruled its prior precedent that a grant of SIJS constitutes an admission for cancellation of removal purposes.

The full text of Murillo-Chavez v. Bondi can be found here:

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2025/02/13/21-1422.pdf

Eighth Circuit Reaffirms that MO Unlawful Exhibition of Weapon Conviction is Crime of Violence

The Eighth Circuit has reaffirmed its precedent that a Missouri conviction for unlawful exhibition of a weapon is a crime of violence, even in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Borden. The court noted that only a plurality of judges required that the violent force required be directed at another person, which Justice Thomas’ concurrence required only that intentional acts be an element of the offense.

The full text of US v. Larry can be found here:

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/22/10/213237P.pdf

Does a non-morally turpitudinous crime become a crime involving moral turpitude due to a gang enhancement? The Ninth Circuit says no!

It's not unusual for the Ninth Circuit and the Board of Immigration Appeals to fight about....well...everything.  And last week, the Ninth Circuit refused to defer to the BIA's determination that a gang enhancement can turn a non-morally turpitudinous offense (such as a simple assault) into a crime involving moral turpitude.  Mr. Hernandez-Gonzalez was convicted of possession of a billy club.  At the sentencing phase, the criminal court added an enhancement because the conviction was related to gang activity.  The Ninth Circuit noted that possession of a billy club is widely acknowledged to be non-morally turpitudinous conduct.  It also reiterated its prior holding that non-fraud crimes will rarely be considered crimes involving moral turpitude unless they require an intent to injury, actual injury, or a protected class of victims.  Neither the underlying weapons possession charge nor the gang enhancement included these factors.   Thus, the gang enhancement did not transform the conviction into a crime involving moral turpitude.

In reaching its conclusion, the Ninth Circuit declined to accord Chevron deference to Matter of E. E. Hernandez, which held that a conviction for vandalism with a gang enhancement was a crime involving moral turpitude.

The full text of Hernandez-Gonzalez v. Holder can be found here: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2015/02/13/11-70359.pdf