No. 19-6055

Edwin Ricardo Flores v. United States

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-09-25
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: aggravated-felony chevron-deference circuit-split criminal-law criminal-procedure ex-post-facto immigration immigration-law separation-of-powers statutory-interpretation theft-offense
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw Takings Immigration Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2020-04-17 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does a 'theft offense (including receipt of stolen property)' under §1101(a)(43)(G) require a taking of property without consent?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED In this criminal “illegal reentry” case, the Ninth Circuit applied Chevron deference to the Board of Immigration Appeals’ interpretation of the phrase “theft offense (including receipt of stolen property)” under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(48)(G). In doing so, the Ninth Circuit adopted a definition that reaches property obtained with consent of the owner. The Fourth, Fifth, Seventh, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits have adopted the opposite construction, ruling that the same phrase requires a taking of property “without consent.” L Does a “theft offense (including receipt of stolen property)” under § 1101(a)(43)(G) require a taking of property without consent? II. May courts defer to an executive agency’s interpretation of a statute that has both criminal and immigration applications? prefix

Docket Entries

2020-04-20
Petition DENIED.
2020-03-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/17/2020.
2020-03-25
Reply of petitioner Edwin Ricardo Flores filed. (Distributed)
2020-03-12
Brief of respondent United States of America in opposition filed.
2020-01-17
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including March 12, 2020.
2020-01-16
Motion to extend the time to file a response from January 22, 2020 to March 12, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-12-05
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including January 22, 2020.
2019-12-04
Motion to extend the time to file a response from December 23, 2019 to January 22, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-11-14
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 23, 2019.
2019-11-13
Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 22, 2019 to December 23, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-10-23
Response Requested. (Due November 22, 2019)
2019-10-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/1/2019.
2019-10-02
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2019-09-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 25, 2019)
2019-07-12
Application (19A55) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until September 21, 2019.
2019-07-08
Application (19A55) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from July 23, 2019 to September 21, 2019, submitted to Justice Kagan.

Attorneys

Edwin Ricardo Flores
Ryan FraserFederal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., Petitioner
Ryan FraserFederal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent