Immigration: Drug Conviction-Removability-Overbreadth of State Offense

Petitioner, a citizen of Mexico, sought review of the BIA’s decision concluding that petitioner was removable for his Kansas state conviction for possession of methamphetamine. Petitioner argued that the offense under Kansas law was broader than the analog drug offense under federal law and that the state law was indivisible. The BIA concluded that the statute was overbroad but divisible, and that petitioner waived his argument that Kansas’s definition of “methamphetamine” was broader than the federal definition.

Where the language of the Kansas statute implicitly demonstrated that drug type was an element of the offense, the BIA correctly found that the statute was divisible and applied the categorical approach to conclude that petitioner was convicted of a drug offense that had an analog under federal law.

Petition is denied.

Barbosa v. Garland (MLW No. 80057/Case No. 22-1655 – 8 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Colloton, J.) Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (Matthew Lorn Hoppock, of Shawnee, KS for petitioner) (Craig Allen Newell, Jr., U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, of Washington, D.C. for respondent)