PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-1147

CESAR SOLIS-FLORES,

Petitioner,

v.

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Argued: December 6, 2022 Decided: September 11, 2023

Before DIAZ, Chief Judge, and RUSHING and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.

Petition for review denied in part, granted in part, and remanded by published opinion. Judge Rushing wrote the opinion, in which Chief Judge Diaz and Judge Heytens joined.

ARGUED: Benjamin Ross Winograd, IMMIGRANT & REFUGEE APPELLATE CENTER, LLC, Alexandria, Virginia, for Petitioner. Sarah Kathleen Pergolizzi, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. ON BRIEF: Lisa T. Johnson-Firth, VANDERPOOL, FROSTICK & NISHANIAN, PC, Manassas, Virginia, for Petitioner. Brian M. Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, David J. Schor, Senior Litigation Counsel, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. USCA4 Appeal: 22-1147 Doc: 67 Filed: 09/11/2023 Pg: 2 of 13

RUSHING, Circuit Judge:

Cesar Solis-Flores, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of a final

order of removal entered by the Board of Immigration Appeals. The Board determined

that Solis-Flores was ineligible for cancellation of removal because his prior conviction for

receipt of stolen property was a crime involving moral turpitude. We agree and so deny

the petition for review in part. The Board also held that the immigration judge (IJ) provided

Solis-Flores with legally adequate notice of the conditions applicable to his voluntary

departure. We disagree and so grant the petition in part and remand to the Board to consider

Solis-Flores’s request for a remand to the IJ for a new period of voluntary departure.

I.

In 2012, the Department of Homeland Security issued Solis-Flores a notice to

appear, charging that he was removable as an alien present in the United States without

having been admitted or paroled. Solis-Flores admitted he was removable as charged and

applied for cancellation of removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b). After conducting a hearing,

the IJ concluded that Solis-Flores was not eligible for cancellation of removal because he

had previously been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude. See 8 U.S.C.

§§ 1229b(b)(1)(C), 1227(a)(2)(A)(i). Specifically, Solis-Flores had a 2000 conviction for

receiving stolen property in violation of Virginia Code § 18.2-108. But the IJ granted

Solis-Flores the privilege of voluntary departure in lieu of removal. See 8 U.S.C.

§ 1229c(b).

Solis-Flores appealed to the Board. Reviewing de novo, the Board held that his

conviction for receipt of stolen property was a crime involving moral turpitude and

2 USCA4 Appeal: 22-1147 Doc: 67 Filed: 09/11/2023 Pg: 3 of 13

therefore Solis-Flores was ineligible for cancellation of removal. The Board declined to

reinstate voluntary departure or remand to the IJ for that purpose because Solis-Flores had

not posted the required bond despite receiving proper notice of his obligation to do so. In

reaching that conclusion, the Board held that the relevant regulation did not requ

Click Here to Read the rest of this document