Legal Opinion · Concurring in the judgment

Gabriel Almanza-Arenas v. Loretta E. Lynch

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided December 28, 2015No. 09-71415, 10-73715Published

1Concurring in the judgmentWatford, Circuit Judge

I agree that Gabriel Almanza-Arenas’ conviction under California Vehicle Code § 10851(a) is not a conviction for a crime involving moral turpitude. But I disagree with the court’s conclusion, predicated on the same reasoning our court adopted in Rendon v. Holder, 764 F.3d 1077 (9th Cir.2014), that § 10851(a) is an “indivisible” statute. I would overrule Rendon, as I think its approach to divisibility analysis is inconsistent with the approach required by Descamps v. United States, — U.S. -, 133 S.Ct. 2276, 186 L.Ed.2d 438 (2013). I will be the first to admit, though, that the correct reading…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. People v. WestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  2. Mellouli v. LynchSupreme Court of the United States · 2015
  3. United States v. Frank M. HowardCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2014
  4. Carlos Rendon v. Eric Holder, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
  5. People v. BarryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API